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

Donations:
Westpac BSB 035612, Account No. 239469


All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

“Climate is and always has been variable. The only constant about climate is change; it changes continually.” ~Professor Tim Patterson

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, July 31, 2010

TCS Press Release

The 2009 State of the Climate’ report, issued by US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), has declared that anthropogenic global warming [AGW] is getting worse. It has 7 rising indicators to prove this. These 7 indicators are shown below from the report. However, of the 7 indicators 6 show a decline, some from 1998, others from 2003. The only rising indicator, sea level, has had a declining rate of increase since 2003.



So from NOAA’s own evidence AGW is not getting worse but has stopped!

Senate Candidates in the 2010 Australian Federal Election

2010 Australian Federal Election

In the 2010 Australian Federal Election, the Climate Sceptics Party will be running candidates for the Senate and selected House of Representative seats.

The following candidates have been endorsed:

* SA – Leon Ashby and Nathan Ashby
* Vic – Chris Dawson and Lee Holmes
* NSW – Bill Koutalianos and Geoff Brown
* Qld – Terry Cardwell and Lance Jones
* WA – Beau Woods and Heather Dewar
* Tas – Frank Waller and Sally Costella

Bios of the Candidates are being added on our website - http://landshape.org/news/

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

The Case against the Greens


John Quiggins, on his blog (link in title) has posted "The Case for the Greens."

While-ever the Greens oppose Australian Sovereignty, I could never vote Green.


Today, I posted this on John's interesting blog:



The Case against the Greens.

The Greens do not believe in Australian Sovereignty. If you do not believe in Australian Sovereignty, then VOTE 1 – Greens.

The Greens, in their policies say this:

Principles

The Australian Greens believe that:

http://greens.org.au/policies/human-rights-democracy/global-governance

1. global governance is essential to meet the needs of global peace and security, justice, human rights, poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability.
2. effective means of global environmental governance are needed to halt and reverse the current trends towards environmental decline across the globe, especially with regard to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate climate change.
3. the system of global governance must be reinvigorated.


No-one should stand for any of Australia’s Parliaments, swear an oath of allegiance and then white-ant Australia’s sovereignty.

KERMIT says: "It's not easy being green!"

Climate Sceptics and Campaigning

Message from Party President Leon Ashby

Dear members and readers,

The Australian Federal election on August 21st will be very important. Perhaps one of the biggest issues is that if the ALP returns a carbon tax looks very likely.

In our view the election of independent thinking senators will be vital. The way the major political parties prevent freedom of thought and speech from their parliamentarians is robbing us of open debate, and true democracy - and that needs addressing as well.

The Climate Sceptics will have a senate candidate in every state and lower house candidates in several marginal seats around the country. We will have our candidates speaking forthrightly on a number of issues as well as refuting any need for carbon taxes

To assist our candidates, we want to put a series of 30 second television ads to air in as many capital cities as possible. They can cost an airtime price from $200 to $3,000 depending the time slot and the city. We are aiming to have some very strong messages with our TV ads mixed with irony, a bit more radical than our last bunch of TV ads. They should cause a stir.
You will get low resolution email copies in a few weeks time for sending to your contacts to enjoy.

We have funding for about 10 ads to be aired in Canberra, but we would like to broadcast in other cities as well.

If you can assist us with a donation (tax deductible up to $1500) it would be much appreciated. You can designate your preferred state that the funds go towards as well with your donation. Please either make a direct deposit into Westpac BSB 035612 A/C 239469 The Climate Sceptics main account or post us a cheque to Climate Sceptics, PO box 721, Mt Gambier SA 5290.

We will send you a receipt by mail or email.

To those who have already sent in some funds - Thanks you very, very much.

Looking forward to your assistance,

Leon Ashby
President the Climate Sceptics
ph 0887235550

PS: (by Geoff Brown) NZ has just introduced their ETS and there have been immediate large price hikes. We need to avoid any form of costs for harmless Carbon Dioxide emissions.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Climate Movie for Young People

Earlier this year, Case Smit and John Smeed arranged and financed the Australian tour of Lord Monckton. Now, to counteract the disinformation taught to young people, Case has asked that the following be distributed.

Climate Movie for Young People


When John Smeed and I brought Lord Monckton to Australia earlier this year, we found that the overwhelming majority of the audiences was definitely of the older generation. Where were the next generation of leaders and problem solvers? Where were the under 40’s? Most of us, but particularly that generation, have been exposed to inconvenient (un)truths, errors and exaggerations from Governments and most of the media, leading to a belief that mankind is guilty of starting a global warming trend that will have catastrophic consequences.

A suggestion was made during the Monckton Tour that a movie be made, aimed specifically at young people, to give them the real facts. This suggestion has been widely supported and has grown to a proposal to make a series of short movies that could be made into one documentary covering the science, economics and the morality of the “global warming” hypothesis. The bulk of the Australian filming is planned for Lord Monckton’s next visit to Australia in September/October 2010. Some more information about the movie is given in the dedicated web site: http://climatesciencerevealed.com/www.climatesciencerevealed.com/Home.htmlevealed.com .

The North American Directors for this proposed movie are Susan Kucera and Gawain Bantle of Cinepartners. The budget amounts to about $300,000, which is very low for the quality of product we have planned given it must contain only incontrovertible facts and be professional enough to have credibility yet sassy enough to outdo “An Inconvenient Truth” in its appeal to youth. Joanne Nova (http://joannenova.com.au/ ), an experienced science communicator, will be the principal script writer and the anchor person. The documentary will feature Lord Monckton, Prof. Ian Plimer, Prof. Peter Ridd, numerous other Australian and overseas experts as well as some teenagers and older “young” people. We will use animated graphics and humour to keep young viewers interested.

The intention is to distribute this movie to schools and to make it available on the internet. We may not be able to get mass distribution through 20th Century Fox, but we expect to get it shown at film festivals and selected cinemas.

We can put on a powerful display of all the images and information that hasn’t been featured in the media – it’s all the front-page news-busting headlines that no one has told our youth.

John Smeed and I are not in a position to underwrite this venture, so we are seeking donations from all like-minded individuals and organisations to provide the necessary funding. To join the team which is fighting back and to help us raise the $300,000 required, there is a “donate” button on page “The Plan” on web site:
http://climatesciencerevealed.com/www.climatesciencerevealed.com/Home.html .
Given the expected wide distribution of this appeal, an average donation of $250 should get us to the target, but obviously we would need quite a few donations much greater than that; naturally any donation will be welcome.

Please pass this email on to everyone you can think of who might be willing to help.
If you can put this appeal on Facebook or another social networking site, please do so.

Thank you,

Case Smit,
Noosaville
Queensland 4566, Australia
+61754730475
climatemovie@gmail.com

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Prince Charles blasts Climate Sceptics


Oh dear, now we not only have to cope with the two Pennies - Wong and Sackett - now we also have Royalty deriding us.

From the UK Press Association:

The Prince of Wales has launched a stinging attack on "climate sceptics", deriding them for peddling "pseudo science".

In a speech to world business leaders at a climate change seminar Charles criticised the group for apparently intimidating people from "adopting the precautionary measures necessary to avert environmental collapse".


Apparently intimidating people? What did the Climategate mob do to editors re peer-reviewing anti-AGW papers?

Charles is further quoted: "People have heard the climate sceptics and attempted to listen to the kind of pseudo science they are peddling...I have endlessly been accused of peddling pseudo science, in one way or another, for most of my life - just think about the strange irony
."

Well, Charlie, we rely on Independent Scientists, oh, and Charlie...
WE DON'T SPEAK TO TREES!

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

IPCC's Amazing Amazon Actuality Abuse


For six months, excellent Author and Journalist Christopher Booker has been chasing down a story re Amazon Rain forests. (Link in title) As Anthony Watts says: IPCC based their claim of rainforest sensitivity on a “probably” sentence in a now defunct activist website.

Excerpts from what Christopher Booker writes in his latest Telegraph Column:

Last week, after six months of evasions, obfuscation, denials and retractions, a story which has preoccupied this column on and off since January came to a startling conclusion. It turns out that one of the most widely publicised statements in the 2007 report of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – a claim on which tens of billions of dollars could hang – was not based on peer-reviewed science, as repeatedly claimed, but originated solely from anonymous propaganda published on the website of a small Brazilian environmental advocacy group.

The ramifications of this discovery stretch in many directions. First, it seems to show that the IPCC – whose reports governments rely on to justify presenting mankind with the largest bill in history – has been in serious breach of its own rules.

Link to Booker in title.

Link to WUWT: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/10/amazongate-proven-ipcc-based-their-claim-of-rainforest-sensitivity-on-a-probably-sentence-in-a-now-defunct-activist-website/

Thanks to Marc Morano and Anthony Watts

Questioning Consensus on (Man-made) Climate Change?

Questioning Consensus on (Man-made) Climate Change?
Letter to the Editor by Leon Ashby - President The Climate Sceptics Party


Julia Gillard is talking of consensus on climate change.

If consensus means we can ask questions before we give a verdict, I have these questions for the PM.

1) Has the world previously warmed without man-made greenhouse gases being a factor? (e.g. the Medievel Warm period in 800 - 1350 AD)
If so - How can we be sure climate change is not just a natural cycle?
2) Has the world warmed in the last 12 years since 1998? If not, then does not that contradict the idea global warming is still occurring?
3) Are greenhouse gases able to cause runaway Global Warming? - If so which scientist has the evidence?
If not, then why wait until the evidence comes in before wasting $billions on an unproven guess?
and finally
4) Will an ALP / Greens controlled senate combined with a sham consensus process force an ETS or a Carbon Tax on Australia (causing much financial hardship).

In my view we need to vote in fearless Independent Senators to ask the hard questions and bring accountability to the processes in Canberra.

Leon Ashby
President The Climate Sceptics

Sunday, July 11, 2010

Unstoppable Global Warming - Every 1500 years.

A few years ago S Fred Singer and Dennis T Avery wrote a book Unstoppable Global Warming – every 1,500 years It was fairly well reviled by Alarmist blogs at the time. Reading this week on Co2 science, I see that there was a peer-reviewed paper available to the alarmists at the time of publication: http://www.co2science.org/articles/V8/N33/C3.php. This refers to a paper Müller, S., Geyh, M.A., Pross, J. and Bond, G.C. 2005. Cyclic climate fluctuations during the last interglacial in central Europe. Geology 33: 449-452.

What was learned
The results of the authors' analysis revealed the presence of 11 major cold events having an average recurrence time of approximately 1450 years over the course of the last interglacial, which periodicity is essentially identical to the millennial-scale oscillation of climate throughout the current interglacial (Bond et al., 1997, 2001; deMenocal et al., 2000; McDermott et al., 2001; Gupta et al., 2003; Hu et al., 2003), as well as the similar oscillation that has been documented throughout interglacial and glacial periods alike over the past half-million years (McManus et al., 1999) and the equivalent oscillation that persisted even before the development of the large 100,000-year ice sheets characteristic of the late Pleistocene (Raymo et al., 1998). As for the cause of the 1450-yr cycle reported by Müller et al., the authors have no definitive answer, but suggest that it may ultimately be the product of variations in solar activity.

What it means

This study adds to the growing body of evidence that earth's climate oscillates in a well-defined manner on a timescale of approximately 1500 years. This knowledge is very important, for it suggests that something other than the historic buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere may be responsible for 20th-century warming, the timing of which fits nicely with the prior history of this oscillation. Indeed, there is absolutely no evidence for any concomitant oscillation in the air's CO2 content accompanying the 1500-year oscillation of climate that was responsible for the warmings that produced the prior Medieval Warm Period and the still earlier Roman Warm Period, nor is there any evidence for such a CO2 oscillation accompanying any of the similar warmings of the penultimate interglacial or the other interglacial and glacial periods through which this persistent oscillation of climate has been documented to occur as far back in time as scientists have been able to peer.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

Pacific islands growing, not sinking


In December 2009, ABC News reported that small island states were sinking fast - like the Titanic.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/17/2774086.htm

"Climate Change Minister Penny Wong says all agree with Australia's position that a 50 per cent cut in emissions is needed by 2050, and a new climate agreement must limit a rise in temperature to no more than 2C by the turn of the century. ... But a 2C temperature rise is too much for low-lying nations who argue they'll sink as a result. They're supporting an agreement put forward by Tuvalu that calls for a cap on emissions."

Engineers' table:
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/water-thermal-properties-d_162.html
show that it takes a temperature rise of 30º to get a 1% increase in sea volume.

Now, six months later, the same ABC, one of the biggest promoters of man-made Global Warming Alarmism has reported : "Pacific islands growing, not sinking." (Link in Title)

"Auckland University's Associate Professor Paul Kench, a member of the team of scientists, says the results challenge the view that Pacific islands are sinking due to rising sea levels associated with climate change.

"Eighty per cent of the islands we've looked at have either remained about the same or, in fact, gotten larger," he said.


From Professor Ian Plimer's Heaven+Earth P299: "Precise Satellite Measurements give sea level rise as half as half that measured from tidal stations. Corrected data for a large part of the globe show a rise of 1.8mm per annum from 1900 to 1980. (peer-reviewed -reference given)

In December, 2007, 103 professional persons wrote a letter to the Secretary General of the United Nations that indicated, contrary to the impression left by the IPCC, that: ‘Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea-level rise and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie outside the bounds of known natural variability.’

Friday, July 9, 2010

Greenland during MWP 3º Warmer

Newest Research Confirms Greenland Region Roasted With Medieval Winter/Summer Temps 3°C Hotter Than Modern Era

We know that when Eric the Red found pasture-land in Greenland the temperatures must have been warmer than today. The archeological dig GUS (Gårdet under Sandet) proved their existence.

Now, a new PEER-REVIEWED paper confirms that Medieval Warming peak sea surface temperatures adjacent to Greenland were some 3°C higher than modern temperatures, both in the winter and summer.

Bonnet, S., de Vernal, A., Hillaire-Marcel, C., Radi, T. and Husum, K. 2010. Variability of sea-surface temperature and sea-ice cover in the Fram Strait over the last two millennia. Marine Micropaleontology 74: 59-74.

What was learned
Bonnet et al. report that the sea surface temperature (SST) histories they developed via the two techniques they employed were "nearly identical and show oscillations between -1°C and 5.5°C in winter and between 2.4°C and 10.0°C in summer," and their graphical results indicate that between 2500 and 250 years before present (BP), the mean SSTs of summers were warmer than those of the present about 80% of the time, while the mean SSTs of winters exceeded those of current winters approximately 75% of the time, with the long-term (2250-year) means of both seasonal periods averaging about 2°C more than current means.

The highest temperatures of all were recorded in the vicinity of 1320 cal. years BP, during a warm interval that persisted from about AD 500 to 720 during the very earliest stages of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), when the peak summer and winter temperatures of the MWP both exceeded the peak summer and winter temperatures of the first several years of the 21st century by about 3°C.

Global Cooling Underway - Peer-reviewed Study


From the Financial Post 6/7/10 -Lawrence Solomon

Global cooling underway

Long-term global cooling began in 2002, according to a just-released study in the Journal of Cosmology, a peer-reviewed publication produced at Harvard-Smithsonian’s Center for Astrophysics. Man-made global warming was real and dangerous, the study finds, but the danger has passed.

The study, authored by Qing-Bin Lu, a rising star at the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Waterloo in Canada, explains why climate models have been so spectacularly wrong in trying to tie the global warming of the last half of the 20th century to CO2 — the climate modelers fingered the wrong culprit when they targeted CO2. The true culprits, Dr. Lu explains, were CFCs, the now banned substances that until the 1990s had been a refrigerant and propellant to products as diverse as air conditioners and hair spray cans.

Fortunately for the globe, environmentalists had CFCs banned because of their role in depleting the ozone layer, not realizing that the ban was simultaneously solving the global warming threat.

According to Dr. Lu, the phase-out of CFCs will be reversing the global warming effect by ushering in a 50 to 70-year period of global cooling.

Thursday, July 8, 2010

ClimateGate Whitewash

Prof Phil Jones has been re-instated!

Would you buy a used car....no...... a used climate model from this man?

Secretive and unhelpful. But scientist in Climategate storm STILL gets his job back


Professor Phil Jones was suspended as head of the influential Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia last year after leaked emails appeared to show his team manipulated data and blocked Freedom of Information requests. But he was reinstated after a six-month inquiry cleared him and colleagues of wrongdoing and concluded their 'rigour and honesty' was not in doubt.

Dr Benny Peiser, director of the sceptical Global Warming Policy Foundation, said that the conclusions were unlikely to restore confidence in climate science. He added: 'There is clearly strong evidence of mishandling of the requests and strong criticism of the university's failure to provide data and information. I don't think the university can just claim that this is a vindication.'

Lord Lawson, ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer and now chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, said the scientists failed to be objective with data. He added: 'This was not due to them being dishonest but they are being so carried away by the cause that they behaved in a way that scientists should not have done.'


'Sceptics claimed report was a whitewash and questioned the reinstatement of Prof Jones. David Holland, one of the leading sceptics on the blogosphere, pointed out that Prof Jones referred to deleting emails in one of his communications. 'Would you trust a man who has asked to delete evidence?Benny Peiser,' he said'
========================================
Secretive and unhelpful. But scientist in Climategate storm STILL gets his job back

By David Derbyshire 8th July 2010

The scientist at the heart of the 'Climategate' scandal got his job back yesterday, despite being criticised by the official inquiry for being secretive and unhelpful.

Gee, really? Some-one that wanted e-mails to be deleted was "secretive and unhelpful?"

==============================
The Climate Sceptics Party promoted a tour of Australia by Jay Lehr last year.
(Jay Lehr holds a degree in Geological Engineering from Princeton and has written 19 books and over 900 journal articles in his fields of expertise. On 36 occasions, Dr Lehr has testified before the US Congress to explain the realities of environmental issues as they relate to pending legislation.)

Jay has commented on the ClimateGate Whitewash:

“It is often said in politics that the cover-up is worse than the crime. The so-called ‘Independent Climate Change Email Review’ headed by Sir Muir Russell is another attempt to ignore, deny, and excuse the misconduct of the East Anglia University Climate Research Unit and the cabal of crooked scientists who fed the global warming delusion. It is an even sadder commentary on science today than the actual collusion and fraud that was clearly perpetrated.

“The Russell report shows that in some places it is deemed business as usual for researchers to force their work in the direction they and their financial supporters desire. As recently as 50 years ago, such scientists would be blackballed for such conduct.

“The real result of all of this will not be a clean reputation for the East Anglia group and its cohorts elsewhere but rather a dramatically reduced faith on the part of the public in the important work of scientists throughout the world.”

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Three Strikes and you're out, AGW

Howard Hayden, professor emeritus of physics at the University of Connecticut. submitted this comment on the draft of the U.S. State Department's Climate Action Report. He notes,

nary a word in the report even pretends to

* establish a link between CO2 and putative global warming

* show that the increase in CO2 concentration is due to human activity instead of natural causes (such as natural warming of the oceans)

* show that either an increase in CO2 concentration or an increase in temperature is, on balance, bad (or worse than laws restricting CO2 emissions) or

* do any science whatsoever.

Judgment on AGW

Judgment on AGW by Three Experts

Written By: J. Scott Armstrong, Kesten C. Green, and Willie Soon

http://www.heartland.org/environmentandclimate-news.org/article/27951/
http://ideas.repec.org/e/pgr97.html

Our research findings challenge the basic assumptions of the State Department’s Fifth U.S. Climate Action Report (CAR 2010). The alarming forecasts of dangerous manmade global warming are not the product of proper scientific evidence-based forecasting methods. Furthermore, there have been no validation studies to support a belief that the forecasting procedures used were nevertheless appropriate for the situation. As a consequence, alarming forecasts of global warming are merely the opinions of some scientists and, for a situation as complicated and poorly understood as global climate, such opinions are unlikely to be as accurate as forecasts that global temperatures will remain much the same as they have been over recent years. Using proper forecasting procedures we predict that the global warming alarm will prove false and that government actions in response to the alarm will be shown to have been harmful.

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

It's Coming to the Alarmists!

Oh dear! It's coming to the Alarmists! (Did I miss the SH?)

As third Climategate report is published, even computer models turn against AGW alarmists
by Gerard Warner

Many of you, I know, will find it almost impossible to sleep tonight: the climactic excitement attending tomorrow’s publication of Sir Muir Russell’s vindication – sorry, investigation – of the scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit is too pulse-quickening.


This will turn the number of inquiries into a hat trick. The general expectation is that this one will be as big a whitewash as its predecessors.

It's the old political trick - know the answer before you announce the enquiry. If you have the judge in your pocket, you have the outcome in your pocket.

Warner goes on to say that Climategate didn't quietly disappear, then the Copenhagen Car crashed.


"There have also been many instances of institutions retreating from their formerly uncritical endorsement of AGW to a more nuanced position; even the Royal Society has been obliged by fellows to go through these motions. The AGW establishment has now come to the realisation it must adopt a new tone."


And now, the computer models are proving a problem for the alarmists.

"Despite the known proclivity of computer models to come up with the findings they have been programmed to produce, Hulme (Mike Hulme, professor of climate change at the University of East Anglia) is conceding that more sophisticated versions are refusing to record the desired result, but in fact the reverse. If even the alarmists’ own tame technology, due to improved accuracy, is refusing to comply with their wish list of global warming symptoms, then the game is well and truly up."

Sunday, July 4, 2010

Hide the Decline then Hide the "Science"


Penn State University has cleared Mr "Hide-the-Decline" Mann.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/02/hockey-stick-climate-scientist-innocent-mann/

But, Steve McIntyre, know as the Dragon-Slayer, who was the main contributor to exposing Mann's Flawed Hockey Stick was not questioned by the panel examining Mann. So who were the panel personnel? "Six of Mann's Penn State colleagues!"

"The committee did not speak with Steven McIntyre, the most outspoken critic of Mann's work..... Lisa Powers, director of information for Penn State, told FoxNews.com that McIntyre's comments were already "well known and publicly available."

It's the second recent whitewash inquiry that did not look at the "Science." Ron Oxburgh's whitewash of climategate also did not look at the science. (See Below http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com/2010/07/climate-news-2nd-july-2010.html)

Hide the Decline,Alarmists. Hide the Decline.

Friday, July 2, 2010

Climate News - 2nd July 2010.

Climate News 2nd July, 2010.

Lord Ron “the Con” Oxburgh admits that the “SCIENCE” was not part of his Climategate Whitewash!

http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/01/oxburgh-and-the-jones-admission/

He wrote the following to Steve McIntyre

Dear Dr Mcintyre,
Thank you for your message. What you report may or may not be the case. But as I have pointed out to you previously the science was not the subject of our study.
Yours sincerly,
Ron Oxburgh


Steve counters: Why would anyone have expected that science would be the subject of study of the Science Appraisal Panel? Well, there’s a good reason why they would. The University of East Anglia and Muir Russell said over and over again that the Science Appraisal Panel would, uh, “re-appraise” CRU’s “science”.
===================================================

A few humans make Victoria much warmer
From Andrew Bolt:

http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermail/andrewbolt/index.php/couriermail/comments/a_few_men_make_victoria_much_warmer

Retired school principal Kenskingdom was alarmed by (a) Bureau of Meterology graph, showing a strong warming trend for Victoria:

He checked the data from which the trend, and found it had first been adjusted and turned into “high quality” data. As a BOM spokesman assured him:
On the issue of adjustments you find that these have a near zero impact on the all Australian temperature because these tend to be equally positive and negative across the network (as would be expected given they are adjustments for random station changes).
===========================================
Climate Change could cause a Flood

We’ve heard it before you say? Well, this will be a flood of Climate Refugees!

http://m.officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=170079&catid=816http://m.officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=170079&catid=816

Australia could face a wave of climate refugees from neighboring Pacific islands unless rich nations help poorer countries with climate change, U.N. scientist warned.
Pacific islands are especially vulnerable to rising sea levels and it is "very likely" that a large-scale relocation of people would be necessary, Martin Parry, visiting professor at the Center for Environmental policy at Imperial College in London, said Tuesday at a conference of more than 900 climate change researchers in Australia.

============================================

Why Do AGW Climate Scientists Feel The Need To Exaggerate or Lie?

AGW Climate Scientist Exposes The Truth'

http://www.c3headlines.com/2010/07/why-do-agw-climate-scientists-feel-the-need-to-exaggerate-or-lie-a-climate-scientist-exposes-the-tru.html
An AGW climate scientist attempted to explain what was happening to his field. His simple synopsis then of the cause for the persistent lies and exaggerations appears rather obvious now in 2010: Money & Fame.
1. "Scientists compete with each other for finite resources, just like bankers and corporations. In this case, successful competitors are those who are rewarded by their universities or institutions. In all science, this means publishing research articles in the refereed scientific literature. That research costs tremendous amounts of money and there really is only one provider: Uncle Sam.....No one gets much of this pie by claiming that his or her issue may, in fact, be no big deal. Instead, any issue – take global warming, acid rain, and obesity as examples, must be portrayed in the starkest of terms. Everything is a crisis, and all the crises are competing with each other [for the "money"].

They have to lie to get the research money! What a surprise!!