Welcome to 3AW. Skip directly to: Search Box, Section Navigation, Content.

3AW - Fairfax Radio Network

Friday September 3, 2010

What we're talking about

'Why do people get so angry?'

Posted by: 3AW Breakfast | 13 January, 2009 - 10:03 AM

3AW Breakfast's political head-kicker, Andrew Bolt, wonders why people take it so personally that he he does not believe in climate change.

Listen to Bolt's take on the debate, and feel free to add your own thoughts on 'climate change' below. Start the debate...

Blog comments Your Say

  • One thing I haven't heard before is that the preconditions for 'tipping over', sending the planet's climate into a nose-dive, have existed many times in prior millions of years. Yet the nose-dive never happened. Isn't that odd? In fact the Earth's fluid systems compensated within a range and life survived. The magnitudes were vastly greater than what puny mankind is emitting now. That makes sense.

    Phred Tuesday 30 June, 2009 - 9:26 PM

  • Bolters should have stuck to his musical career instead of being the lone left wing voice of lost causes. Perhaps he could tell us where he got his science degree/PHD from, particularly in relation to Environment Science? His views seem to closely follow those same sentiments expressed by two groups - the NRA in the US (dubious scientific reports funded by energy companies), generally as a means to 'educate' rednecks living in Southern USA, AND that charming, entertaining program produced by Martin Durkin for Channel 4 BBC entitled 'The Great Global Warming Swindle'. Bolters, there's actually two parts to 'Global Warming' - extremes of temperatures and weather conditions in both summer and winter, if not all year around. The records relating to the average mean temperature in Australia somewhat contracts your theories. Your 'science' generally relates to the last 100 years, whereas ice core samples taken from both ice caps (at least a thousands years PLUS of environmental data) seems to totally contradict your statements and evidence. Yes we all know about the influence of sun spots, but the scientific evidence just doesn't stack up. Close, but not close enough! I actually read about Global Warming and damage to the ozone layer in a science journal back in 1965/66, so it's not exactly NEW science. Maybe you should consider fortune telling?

    Lenny Friday 20 March, 2009 - 6:50 PM

  • What global warming?
    If they can clone humans please make more Bolts asap, seems to me to be a lone voice of reason against a tide of left wing extremists.

    steve Thursday 12 February, 2009 - 7:38 AM

  • I also believe global warming is not man-made, but caused by natural changes which have been occuring over millions of years.How presumptious of us to believe we can influence earth's atmosphere for good or bad. However, with global warming used as a catch-all phrase to alert us to treating our planet better, I don't disagree with that. Just for different reasons.

    marg summers Sunday 1 February, 2009 - 11:36 AM

  • Having read several of Mr Bolt's articles on global warming (the denial thereof), I note that he has frequently selected facts from various sources and used these to support an argument that they were never intended to support. He is not an expert on atmospheric physics, so hopefully his readers will take his opinions with the proverbial grain of salt that most journalism warrants.

    Rhonda Friday 30 January, 2009 - 11:55 PM

  • The problem with Andrew is not his "facts" but that fact that his opinion lines up with those who share his ideology.

    So it doesn't make him a sceptic, but rather a conformist.

    I'm a right wing voter and global climate change believer.

    Why? Because I believe in NASA reports rather than the crackpots Andrew relies on.

    SSG

    SSG Friday 23 January, 2009 - 9:31 AM

Post a comment * Mandatory fields