The facts on the public record are now that trained civil servants,emergency services, the flood commmittee and scientists, group indoctrinated to deny what was happening around them and about to happen,, Were the only and sole cause of the Brisbane Wivenhoe release and subsequent billions of $ of damage.
+
Sue them and perhaps they will better understand the nature of nature.
And how they failed us all when we did rely on them.
+
Anna lied all the way thru her TV appearances as did Julia.
It is now clear by the timeline and the reporting lines that she fully knew 3 days before the forced release the Dam had thresholded and was out of control.
And she fully knew the consequences including for herself.
Australia will judge this lot very harshly.

This is well researched and well presented.

Your line of argument is clear and strong.

Are you keeping a list of the names of the CAGW fear mongers in Australia, so that their false prophecies can be recalled when they try to influence public thinking after this CAGW businesss has blown over?

The Flood peak just before the January 2011 floods in Brisbane was 5.44 metres, considerably below the peaks of 1893. Since this flood peak is independent of what is stored or released by the Wivenhoe Dam, I think it provides further evidence that the January 2011 flood in Brisbane was well below the levels of 1893

“Renewable energy cheaper power bills”? You have got to be kidding!. Why are we subsidising Solar Panel installations and Wind Generators if it is cheaper? If renewables were cheaper, we would not need a carbon tax, because we would be flocking to have them installed. The problem is its more expensive.

“Less wars over oil”. So we make sure that the poor people of the world have less access to cheap coal fired power, and that they can only access much more expensive renewable power, and the world will be a happy cheery place. Lets ban our coal exports so that the peasant farmers of western china cannot access cheap coal fired power, and make sure their life is harder by forcing them to built expensive renewable power (or maybe nuclear reactors), while we sit in Australia in the posh inner city suburbs of our Australian cities, happy with our lot, because we have already had plenty of economic development fueled by cheap coal-fired power.

“Everybody wins if we become less dependent on carbon based products” . Really? The poorer people who live on the outer suburbs of our Australian cities who will pay more for transportation, as well as more for electricity, and gas. The poorer people of the rest of the world who will never be allowed access to cheap coal-fired power.

Everybody wins?

You have provided, the graph of Brisbane rainfall statistics. Brisbane is flooded by what falls in the catchment areas of the Brisbane river not by what falls in Brisbane Do you have the figures for that rainfall in those years.
You have provided the figures for 2010, I suspect much of the rainfall that damaged Brisbane in 2011, fell this year, and would likely not have been recorded in the 2010 figures.
Whilst It may be ‘speculation’ to argue the level of flood mitigation that the dams have provided, I think it is disingenuous to suggest that they have provided none. you asked in your original blog why the floods were worse in ’74 and 1893, I think John’s answer remains valid.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jan/12/2010-joint-warmest-on-record

Because of people like you, Minchin, Abbott, Bolt and so forth – all Climate Science experts with years of training, no one was prepared for the possibility that the ACTUAL scientists know what they are talking about.

One last though, CCD. The Climate doesn’t begin and end at the Australian shore line. Go get a thing called an atlas and have a look. There’s a few other places out there. When you discover that fact, go and have a look on the Internet at the weather patterns in the places you obviously know don’t exist.

Good luck trying to convince Australian people to listen to you and not the scientists. Even once dyed in the wool deniers I know are questioning the fools who have spread so much apathy.

According to the vast majority of practicing climate scientists, the present trigger for the present global warming is due an increase of CO2 which is the equivalent of 1 watt per cubic meter of atmosphere. No amount of hyperbole by climate skeptics can account for this most basic question — where does this extra energy goes in the climate system go? The only credible — and exhaustively documented — theory is that the extra heat-trapping gas we are adding to the system does, in fact, warm the atmosphere.

The fact that the normal triggers of climate change are not in operation at this time (orbit and tilt) — or actually moving in the opposite direction (the solar output) — to the observed trends reinforces the accepted theory of AGW.

Or you can show me EVIDENCE to the contrary.

I am a private individual, paid by no-one. Isn’t it such an easy out to claim that anyone who dares argue against the Climate Change orthodoxy is in the pay of “Big Oil”. Its such a weak argument.

As for “Biddulph predicted that the Liberal Party would never govern again FEDERALLY” . Biddulph never predicted the Liberal Party would only die Federally, he did not make any qualification (try reading his article again here). As for the Greens having 20% of the vote, very wishful thinking. The National vote for the Greens was 11.7% here. Since when has 11.7% been “They aren’t quite at 20%, but damn’ close”.

As for “No point arguing about Climate Change”, that’s the whole point isn’t it? You don’t want anyone to argue about climate change do you? because what if if your arguments are wrong?

Why isn’t your name and background on this website ? Are you hired by Big Oil?

No point arguing about Climate Change, because soon enough the argument will be over. We’ll know.

Here at World Spinner we are debating the same thing……

Here at World Spinner we are debating the same thing……