We are a shoe-string operation. Unfortunately no BigOil funding! Help expose the hoax.

Westpac BSB 035612, Account No. 239469

All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Saturday, 3 October 2015

AGW Hoax now propped up by Australia's Major Parties; Don't let them sign @ COP21.

Below there is an invitation that was sent to all MPs.
It shows plans for climate change briefings and meetings in Canberra, co hosted by Greg Hunt (Liberal), Mark Butler (Labor) and Larissa Waters (Greens). There is a bipartisan movement between the three parties to move forward with plans to sign the UN Climate Change Agreement in Paris in December. They're all in this together.

The speakers at this meeting are all warmists, e.g. David (24 lies in 3 minutes) Karoly and others. There is no balance from people like Bob Carter or Ian Plimer. Of course there isn't - the truth is inconvenient. No wonder Hunt shut down Tony Abbott's investigation into the homogenised (read: manipulated to show warming) temperature data exposed by Dr Jennifer Marohasy.
Turnbull and Bishop are planning to sign the Paris climate change agreement in December - There is no doubt about it. Once signed, Direct Action will become a thing of the past - to be replaced by carbon permits, carbon trading and our money going overseas to the UN instead of staying in Australia. 
Everything we fought against when Turnbull was Opposition Leader, and when Rudd was PM.
I hope others who read this share it with their friends to get the message out. 
Ring MPs, especially the Nationals, and let them know you don't want Australia joined at the hip with the corrupt and unelected UN and that you don't support Australia signing the UN Climate Change Treaty in December.
Make a noise: only people power can stop this.

Dear Member,
I write to invite you and your advisors to a Parliamentary Information Session on the Science of Climate Change.
At the session leading Australian climate scientists will discuss the impact of Australia’s decision to sign the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals and the upcoming COP21. 
There is also an opportunity for you to meet with climate researchers in private briefings, should your diary permit.

Information Session
Date: Tuesday 20 October 2015
Time: 12:30pm – 1:30pm
Venue: Reps Committee Room 1R1, Parliament House, Canberra

Private Briefings 
Date: Tuesday 20 and Wednesday 21 October 2015 
Time and Venue: To be confirmed – please email **** to arrange

Supported by The Honourable Greg Hunt MP, Mr Mark Butler MP and Senator Larissa Waters, the lunchtime information session will include presentations from some of Australia’s most eminent climate change researchers based at leading research institutions across the country. You can find short biographies on these scientists in the attached. 
There will be a focus on the local, regional and global impacts of climate change (in particular the effects of sea level rise), the economics of reducing Australia’s emissions, and possible mitigation and adaptation measures. In addition, a broader discussion will consider how Australia can address the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and, I hope, provide fruitful information in the lead up to COP21 in Paris in November. 
We hope you and your advisors will be able to find time in your busy schedule to attend this information session and/or meet privately with the visiting researchers on Tuesday 20 and Wednesday 21 October to discuss any area of climate science of interest. 
To arrange an individual meeting, or for more details about the information session, please contact **** advising if there are specific climate scientists you would like to attend your private briefing. 
We look forward to meeting with you.
Kind regards,

Friday, 2 October 2015

AGW disproved again. Alarmism is a sham.

 Anthony Cox

I have written before about two absolutely fatal contradictions to alarmism.

The first is that CO2 and temperature are not correlated. 

Beenstock et al 1 and 2 clearly show that CO2 and temperature are not (causally) correlated, that CO2 will only have a temporary effect on temperature if its rate of increase is sufficient and even this temporary effect is problematic since it is clear that CO2 follows temperature and often they move in different directions.

The second is that humans are not responsible for the increase in atmospheric CO2. Knoor, Gloor and Essenhigh show this, as do Pettersson, Salby and Quirk.

These two facts are the death-knell of alarmism but witless politicians and activist scientists at the BOM, CSIRO and academia and a compliant media are keeping the corpse animated.

So for what it’s worth another recent paper has confirmed these two points. The paper is by Jamal Munshi, a researcher at Sonoma State University. Jamal found the usual relation between CO2 and temperature with CO2 following temperature as per Henrys Law.

In addition Jamal finds that the increase in CO2 is not due to human CO2 ie ACO2.

Figure 7: Comparison of short term fluctuations in the original time series

Jamal’s Figure 7 is similar to Quirk’s graph of the relationship between ACO2 and CO2 atmospheric levels:

Both graphs show a lack of correlation between ACO2 and CO2 which is consistent with what Knoor found:

As is plain from all three graphs, there is little correlation between ACO2 emissions and the atmospheric concentration of CO2 except that both are generally going up. If humans are not responsible for all and possibly very little of the increase in CO2, it would not matter if CO2 was causing temperature to rise because humans are not responsible for the increase in CO2. But in addition it is also plain that CO2 does not drive temperature but rather it is the other way round.

Alarmism is a sham.

Thursday, 1 October 2015

Liar, Liar, Vestments on Fire! Climate Change Advocates lies

International Climate Science Executive Director TOM HARRIS has written a piece titled:

Lying to Boost the Climate Scare

Business leaders were thrilled that Pope Francis so strongly supported capitalism in his speech before the joint session of Congress on September 24. Speaking on condition of anonymity, the CEO of one of America’s largest corporations said, 
“By proclaiming business ‘a noble vocation’ and encouraging the ‘harnessing of the spirit of enterprise,’ Francis showed he is one of us!”
Independents also were ecstatic that the Pope supported their cause — the abolition of political parties. Speaking on behalf of the Nonpartisan Society of America, Sofia Left-Right said, 
“The pontiff was clear. He said that we must ‘confront every form of polarization which would divide it into these two camps.’ Clearly, the Pope wants America to return to the one party system of George Washington!”
Vestments on Fire
This is silly, of course. No one really claimed that Francis is a diehard capitalist or an independent, or even promoted those points of view. However, as the Reuters reported, 
“Presidential candidates from both sides of the divide held up the Pope’s comments as evidence that the leader of America’s 70 million Catholics agrees with them.”
Most desperate to show the Pope was on their side were climate activists and their allies in the press. So desperate, in fact, that they simply made up what they wish Francis had said to Congress, but in fact never did.
Sporting a “Faith Alliance for Climate Protection” t-shirt at the demonstration on the National Mall, Dave Parsons told CBC News’ Paul Hunter, “I was very pleased with what he [Francis] said. He said what needs to be said: we’re responsible [for climate change], and he said it’s caused by humans and I strongly believe that.”
Fellow demonstrator Sierra Club activist Susan Stillman said,
“He did a great job. He did what I expected him to do. And I hope Congress will take it to heart and do something. We gotta’ act on climate.”
Hunter nodded in agreement.

Citizen’s Climate Lobby (CCL) told a similar story on their Web site asserting, “When Pope Francis addressed a joint session of Congress Thursday, he spoke to several important problems facing the country, not the least of which was climate change.”

Global warming campaigners at 350.org even issued a press release proclaiming the fabricated news: “350: Pope Francis’ Speech Underlines Need for Real Leadership on Climate Change.”
None of this was unexpected, of course. Groups like Sierra, CCL and 350.org often stretch the truth to their advantage, although rarely going so far as to create news that never happened.
What was unusual, however, was the extent to which mainstream media went to prop up the illusion that Francis boosted action on climate change in his speech to Congress.
The Washington Post led the way in a piece entitled “The Pope asked Congress to do one specific thing: Address climate change. It won’t.” The newspaper proclaimed, “On every other topic, the Pope pointed indirectly at the path he’d recommend. On climate change, he called Congress to do something concrete.” The Post captioned a video on their site, “Pope Francis calls for ‘responsible action’ on climate change.”
The Guardian was not far behind in the fabricated news department, asserting in their September 24 article, “Pope’s climate change appeal boosts hope for bipartisan action in Congress,” that “He [Francis] re-affirmed that human activity was driving climate change, and that political leaders needed to act.” Like the Post, Guardian editors created a make-believe caption under a photo of the Pope speaking to Congress: “Pope Francis calls on the US – and Congress – to lead the charge in efforts to combat climate change.”
And so it continued throughout the press. USA Today, PBS, CNN, and CNBC all fabricated the news to make it appear as if Francis had, to quote CNBC, “urged lawmakers … to take ‘courageous actions’ on global warming.”
The New Republic was one of the few media organizations that got it right. Rebecca Leber, a staff writer for the magazine, said simply, “Pope Francis never once mentioned the words ‘climate change’ in his address on Thursday.”
The closest the Pope came to addressing climate change was when he told Congress:
“I call for a courageous and responsible effort to ‘redirect our steps’ and to avert the most serious effects of the environmental deterioration caused by human activity.”
This could have referred to any number of environmental problems — ocean pollution, species extinction, air pollution in developing countries, and so on. Yet none of the groups fighting against those very real problems made up news to make it seem as if the Pope boosted their causes. Only climate campaigners, and their opportunistic allies in the press, did.
The public are used to yellow journalism — climate activists and their media friends exaggerating climate concerns and not reporting information that could sway the public against the UN’s futile, but dangerous attempts to control climate. Their lack of reporting of the ‘out clause’ for China in the coming UN climate change agreement to be signed in Paris in December is an example. Not mentioning how the US was shafted in the recent agreement between the President Barack Obama and President Xi Jinping of China concerning their respective post-2020 actions on climate change is another.
But their fictional reports about last week’s papal address to Congress crossed a new threshold. Today’s activists, both inside and outside of the press, are following a strategy much like that of media which fabricated news stories designed to fuel the public’s passion for war against Mexico in the late 19th century. Today’s historians regard the Spanish-American War as the first press-driven war. Future historians will regard today’s war on coal and other fossil fuels as also press-driven, devoid of any serious science, engineering or economics foundation. Shame.

Saturday, 26 September 2015

Pope, UN sabotaging development goals with climate mitigation focus

OTTAWASept. 25, 2015 /CNW/ - "By promoting the unfounded idea that humanity controls Earth's climate, Pope Francis and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon are sabotaging many of the most important goals of today's UN Sustainable Development Summit," said Tom Harris, Executive Director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC). 
"As described in yesterday's ICSC news release, "Pope on wrong side of history on climate change," (click here to view), efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to 'stop global warming' cause unintended consequences that counter the social justice and environmental protection efforts of the UN and the Catholic Church."
ICSC Strategic Advisor and Founding Chairman Terry Dunleavy of New Zealand advised, 
"Pope Francis and Mr. Ban should pay more attention to the UN's My World survey that shows what the public consider important. 
"The 8.4 million people polled to date say that, in comparison with most of the other UN post-2015 development agenda—issues such as health promotion, hunger alleviation and access to clean water, sanitation, and affordable energy—they care little about climate change." 
Dr. Tim Ball, former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg explains, 
"Most of the public, especially the poor, recognize that solving the problems we face today is vastly more important than trying to affect future climate."
"The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) reports demonstrate that much of what we thought we knew about climate change is either wrong or highly debateable." 
Tim Ball is an ICSC science advisor and author of the 2014 book The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science
"Yet, based on the assumption that climate science is 'settled', politicians foolishly want to phase out the use of inexpensive coal for generating electricity in developed nations and prevent poor Africans from using this resource to produce the electricity they need for poverty alleviation."
Ball concluded:
"World leaders attending today's Summit must insist that climate mitigation be completely removed from the UN's post-2015 development agenda."
To arrange interviews with ICSC participants (listed here), contact:   Tom Harris, Executive Director, ICSC
Ottawa, Canada
Email: tom.harris@climatescienceinternational.net 
Phone: 613-728-9200

Friday, 25 September 2015

Global warming policies are the real threat to the world's most vulnerable people

Global warming policies are the real threat to the world's most vulnerable people

Pope on wrong side of history on climate change

Press Release From:  

Tom Harris, Executive Director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC).

Palm oil: Future biofuel or ecological disaster?
OTTAWASept. 24, 2015 /CNW/ - 
Rather than simply follow the United Nations on climate change, Pope Francis must consider whether U.N. climate policies are doing more harm than good. Based on a theoretical hypothesis about climate change, the Pope is unwittingly supporting a movement that works against the Catholic Church's social justice and environmental protection efforts."

Dr. Ian D. ClarkUniversity of Ottawa earth sciences professor, gives an example.

"By promoting the idea that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions must be reduced to prevent dangerous climate change, climate activists encourage the expanded use of biofuels. The result is that, in 2011, 6.5% of the world's grain went to producing fuel instead of food, contributing to food price spikes that are a disaster for the world's poorest people." 
"Biofuels need enormous amounts of fertilizer which ends up in streams and eventually the ocean where it promotes the growth of microorganisms such as algae. This depletes oxygen resulting large 'dead zones' in which no amphibians or fish can survive." 
"The demand for biofuels also causes serious problems for indigenous land owners in developing nations." 
Clark continued, pointing to February 2015 open letter to the European Parliament from 197 civil society organisations from AsiaAfrica, and Latin America which asserted: 
"The destruction of forests and fertile agricultural land to make way for oil palm plantations is jeopardising the food sovereignty and cultural integrity of entire communities who depend on the land as their source of food and livelihoods."
Clark added: 
"Providing palm oil for biodiesel, again largely driven by the climate scare, had led to the replacement of virgin forests with monoculture plantations, greatly reducing biodiversity over vast regions. Pope Francis should do nothing to encourage these violations of social justice and environmental protection."
New Zealand-based consulting engineer Bryan Leyland, an alternative energy expert and ICSC's Energy Issues Advisor, explains another issue that should concern the Pope.
"The international focus on reducing CO2 emissions makes it more difficult for developing countries to finance the construction of vitally-needed power plants. For example, South Africa was able to secure a $3.9 billion loan in 2010 to build the Medupi coal-fired power station only because developing nation representatives on the World Bank board voted for approval. The U.S. and four European nation members abstained from approval because of their worries about climate change. They seemed to want South Africans to use wind and solar power instead, sources too expensive for widespread use even in the wealthiest nations."
Leyland concluded,:
"Rather than hypothetical future climate change, the Pope should help focus the world's attention on the millions of Africans who suffer severe respiratory illnesses and extreme poverty because they lack an electricity supply – a supply that could be easily obtained from their fossil fuel reserves that rich people in Western countries don't want them to use." 
Strategic Advisor and ICSC Founding Chairman Terry Dunleavy of New Zealand explains yet another unintended consequence of the climate scare.
 "Because of the nonsensical belief that humans control climate as if we had a global thermostat, only about 7% of the almost $1 billion USD spent daily across the world on climate finance is dedicated to helping vulnerable people cope with climate change today. The remainder is spent trying to stop phenomena that might someday happen. This is immoral, in effect valuing the lives of people yet to be born more than those in need today." 
ICSC chief science advisor, Professor Bob Carter, former Head of the Department of Earth Sciences at James Cook University in Australia adds:
"Because he has been misinformed by his scientific advisors, the Pope supports the replacement of fossil fuels with renewable energy. Such an action would work directly against the Church's social justice and environmental concerns, especially when one considers the impact of the hundreds of thousands of industrial wind turbines (IWTs) that are being constructed worldwide."
"The American Bird Conservancy estimates that by 2030 well over 1 million birds, including endangered species such as eagles and hawks, will be killed in the United States each year by wind turbines. Spain's Ornithological Society estimates that the 18,000 wind turbines in that country could be killing six million or more birds and bats every year."

"Without subsidies, the real cost of electricity from wind power is about three to four times that of a modern coal-fired electricity station. Denying poorer nations the means to construct environmentally-friendly and cost efficient coal-fired power stations precludes their development and reinforces the economic subjugation of their most vulnerable citizens. Why would Pope Francis support burdening the poorest people in the world with such discriminatory policies and heavy financial loads?" 
Harris describes Ontario's IWT tragedy as a warning to the U.S. 
"Despite constructing 6,736 IWTs, only 4% of our power came from wind energy in 2013 and 1% from solar, yet together they accounted for 20% of the commodity cost paid by Ontarians. So, as the government closed down the 25% of our electricity that used to come from coal, power rates have soared, mostly affecting the poor. Why would the Pope want Americans to repeat Ontario's mistakes?"
"Besides a significant loss in property value for homes near IWTshealth concerns aboundA particularly tragic example is occurring in West Lincoln, Ontario. There, just as in dozens of other counties, the government is breaking an election promise to not permit IWT construction in regions where there is strong public opposition. Wind developers have received approval to install at least seventy-seven 3 Megawatt IWTs in the West Lincoln region, each as tall as a 61 story building, some so close to residential areas that families will be driven from their homes."
Harris summarizes, "In all of these cases, climate mitigation takes precedence over the urgent needs of the present. Pope Francis must distance himself from the U.N.'s climate scare, not march with it."

Tuesday, 22 September 2015


Here is NZ Climate Truth Newsletter No 344

Vincent Gray

Guest Writer Kerry Brown, ESQ, St. Petersburg.
The USA is completely powerless to decrease global CO2 emissions. In fact there will be significant increases in global emissions regardless of what onerous regulations we put in place. Why you ask?

  1. China now consumes 45% of the world’s coal. (See, NY Times 8/16/14 editorial).
  2. China’s CO2 output has grown to 2x that of the US. It will increase as China is projected to double its output by 2040.(Huffington Post 12/5&15, 2014 citing the US Gov’t). US C02 emissions have only slowly increased even before the recent war on coal.
  3. China has built about 3 or 4 coal fired energy plants every month for the past 10 years and has separate plans to build 50 coal gasification plants estimated to produce 1.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide/year per Greenpeace as cited in the NY Times 7/23/14. (See also Eric Larson in Climate Central 1/27/14).
  4. The green group Kiko Network reports that Japan is going to construct 43 coal fired plants to replace nuclear power. We haven’t begun to talk about a growing India and other countries.
  5. Global temperatures have been essentially flat since 1998 contrary to the billion dollar computer models we taxpayers have paid for. (“Global Warming has stalled since 1998-Met Weather Office admits Earth’s temp has risen slower
    than 1st thought” Daily Mail January 8, 2013).
  6. Pope Francis in his recent encyclical on the environment stated, “I am concerned to encourage an honest and open debate so that particular interests or ideologies will not prejudice the common good.” How that will happen is problematic given that alarmists rarely accept offers to debate. In fact, instead of debate, the mean greenies have tried to go after the jobs of realists, such as Dr. Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and Dr. Legates at the University of Delaware.
  7. There is not a 97% consensus among scientists and it’s one of many misleading assertions by the global warming zealots. See, D. R. Legates, et al., “Climate Consensus and Misinformation” (Science and Education, August 2013).
  8. If the US is irrelevant, why harm our citizens and our economy by making energy much more expensive and unreliable (energy for manufacturing and transport being key cost components of a product)? See the Associated Press article of 5/21/14, “Your Electric Bill Will Skyrocket with New Energy Regulations.”
The scare mongers are at the least, grossly overstating humans’ contribution to global warming and grossly understating the effect of solar, ocean and other natural cycles. At worst, there has been a corruption of science by an unholy alliance of green zealots, grant driven scientists, power hungry politicians, and a brainwashed/lazy media and populace all greased by billions upon billions of your hard earned money.
This essay has quoted mainstream media and environmentalist sources, save one. If you have an open mind, please visit the Heartland Institute.org for realist/skeptic science and opinions.We may also discuss what to do if global warming dramatically increases. Namely, shouldn’t we transfer our massive research and subsidy monies towards flooding mitigation and developing heat tolerant food crops?
My next essay will concentrate on the complex science of climate change. And why do we spend billions of dollars on subsidies that actually hurt the poor and wildlife? Another area to explore is the ample evidence of some benefits to a warming Earth.
Kerry H. Brown, Attorney,  kerryhbrown@gmail.com, 447 Third Avenue N. Suite 310, St. Petersburg, FL 33701,  727-823-1776