I write a column for the Molong Expresshttp://www.molongexpress.com.au, the newspaper serving Molong and the other villages in the Cabonne Shire of New South Wales. On May 2nd, 2019, we printed an article titled Politicians again show “Real Genius“, and given the subtitle “The view from The Other Side” by me. Sent as an email by a reader, it was harshly critical of governments past and present, and of institutions responsible for the research that often influences government policy.
Prompted by questions from another reader, I carried out some research on sources used in the submitted piece and found that at least some of the statements made were to be found in an online blog by a Joanne Nova, the ‘author of the “Skeptics Handbook”, blogger and “libertarian”,’ and a supporter of the IPA, an ultra-conservative right-wing think tank, with aims as dubious as its published philosophies. Though Ms Nova would appear to agree that there is some degree of global warming, she believes that it is not nearly as serious as the overwhelming majority of scientists argue and that the rise will only be in the vicinity of 0.5°C. In her blogs, she often puts forward the view that the push to renewable energy is nothing but a money grab on the part of governments and some corporations.
Lack of an apostrophe and US spelling aside, “The Skeptics Handbook” raised alarm bells. How can anyone of scientific background (Ms Nova has degrees in, among other things, microbiology) dispute the findings of the overwhelming majority of the world’s climate scientists? Some of her comments also suggest that she believes in conspiracy theories, though whether or not she follows those who accuse NASA, China, the UN and a cartel of Jewish bankers of spreading fear of climate change to aid them in their quest or world domination is not known.
To anyone who cares to think about such things, to deny the
scientific evidence on climate change is akin to denying that vaccination has
saved millions of lives and untold suffering or believing that the world is
under the covert control of a race of lizards from outer space who appear to
humans as Jews. Before you spit out your cornflakes over that last statement,
one candidate in the forthcoming election believes that it is so.
So, if you’ll bear with me, I’d like to go back to that article and look at some of the points it raises. The first was in connection to the reference to the then Whitlam Labor government’s plan to build a vast network of pipelines to carry gas from the North-West Shelf to every major city in Australia. Obviously it was something Ms Nova doesn’t agree with, something she has in common with the Liberal Party then led by Malcolm Fraser and the English government of the day, though the latter’s objections may have been based more on the fact that Whitlam’s government had said it was going to use loans arranged by “a mysterious Pakistani” (Nova’s words) rather than from a British institution.
Having blasted Whitlam and his government for daring to have a grand plan for Australia, Nova goes on to harshly criticise successive governments for not having one. Of course, all the reasons for Whitlam’s dismissal by the Crown will never be known until the relevant documents are released by Buckingham Palace, but Nova’s view does seem contradictory.
Ms Nova then goes on to criticise renewable energy and the
transmission network, delivering “piddling amounts” of power and funded by
raising foreign debt, while coal- and nuclear-powered generation plants go
unbuilt. Apart from the environmental damage wrought by coal-powered plants and
the risks to future generations posed by both, the time involved in building
both types of power plant is an important factor. Years, if not decades are
involved, by which time the social fabric and economy could be dissolving into
chaos unless governments all over the world stop sitting on their hands while
Earth undergoes changes on a scale unprecedented in human history.
She also bemoans the fact that no hydro-electric schemes have been built in recent years, and argues for more and bigger dams to trap water that otherwise would go to “irrigate distant oceans”. This is always popular with the proponents of the Bradfield scheme* and the dam-everything school, but it ignores the fact that water flowing into the oceans is not wasted; it is vital for maintaining the health of estuarine and coastal ecosystems. Fisheries depend on these systems to replenish stocks and to maintain inshore populations of species. Equally important, this run off is vital to the survival of mangroves, the first line of defence against storm-surges. Mangroves will become even more important as sea levels rise.
Also ignored is greed-induced blindness, something seemingly
hard-wired into politicians and their corporate backers. No matter how many
dams are built, or how much water and land are “available”, it will never be
enough. Over-allocation of water and the associated cronyism and corruption
will lead us exactly to where we now find ourselves, but on a larger scale.
Environmental advocates and Indigenous peoples cop a bit of
criticism in the first paragraphs, but more of that later. Ms Nova also blames “Canberra
and the states” for the protests against gas exploration – presumably referring
to the Lock the Gate movement among others – ignoring the fact that these are
people-based protests, often made as a direct result of governments’
She goes on to criticise the CSIRO for contributing to
climate change hysteria and science generally for promoting gender-equality
issues and green activism. Not only is this utter rot, it conveniently ignores
the fact that under Tony Abbott’s ultra-conservative, anti-science government,
the CSIRO was gutted of both funding and staff (as was the Antarctic Division),
severely curtailing many of its research programs, climate study among them, and
flying in the face of global trends. Abbott then allocated funding to cancer
research (presumably “believable science”), a noble initiative but I suspect
more in the hope that his name would forever be associated with a “silver
bullet cure-all” while at the same time allowing him to deliver a kick in the
guts to those involved in what he believes is the “crap science” of climate
Now to Ms Nova’s concluding paragraph: “As Australia’s first
people discovered, if today’s Australians lack the will or the knowledge to use
our great natural resources, more energetic people will take them off us.”
It’s hard to ignore the racism inherent in this statement, racism also apparent in her reference to uranium deposits “sterilised by the Giant Rainbow Serpent”. Okay, perhaps she’s not racist and just believes Australia’s Indigenous peoples are lazy beings who practice a primitive religion that deifies mythical creatures. What about the recent outpouring of grief in the “energetic” and sophisticated Western world over the loss of a building representing a religious sect whose adherents practice ritual cannibalism, believe virgins can give birth and that people can rise from the dead.
And who are these “more energetic people” poised to seize
our coal and uranium? Let me guess…the Chinese? The Indonesians? Well they’d
better get a move on; giant global corporations with no loyalty to any
particular country are already in there getting our resources out of the ground
as fast as governments will allow. There seems a philosophy present in the
corporate world that urges its adherents to make as much money as they possibly
can before it all hits the fan. Are the few “energetic” people hoping their
money will save them and the rest of us will have to cope as best we can?
Perhaps Ms Nova could revisit that last paragraph and alter it to read something like “As Australia’s first people discovered, the land in which we live is capricious and finely balanced. If today’s Australians lack the will or the knowledge to properly care for it, nature will take it from us.”
*The “Bradfield Scheme” was put forward in 1938 as a means of irrigating and “drought-proofing” arid regions of the Queensland and South Australian interiors. Involving damning and “turning back” of northern rivers, calculations were faulty and projections based on European models were unrealistic. Politicians are fond of extolling its virtues, especially when elections are held during periods of drought, as is now the case.