Global Warming Skeptics

Hi All,
My apologies I may have started this thread elsewhere in the forum before,
but I can not find it now, it may have been on the old forum.
So, I'll restart the thread posting the latest newsletters as I get them.

Climate Sceptics News & Views - 10th Feb

Hi Everyone:


I'm happy to inform that Lord Monckton’s tour of Australia has been a massive success.
Just about every appearance has been sold out.
Last Saturday’s was so popular that not even local MPs could get a seat:
http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/sto...ge-debate/


For those that have been meaning to hear him speak, his final appearance will be
on Feb.12th at the Sydney Hilton Hotel 12.30 pm where he will debate lecturer Tim Lambert.
More information about this attached.


If you weren’t able to make it to Lord Monckton’s visits, and are not able to make it to the upcoming one in Sydney, do not despair. For anyone interested, Leah Hobbs is offering DVD sets of Lord Monckton’s Brisbane visits for $35 each. The DVDs will include over two hours of one on one interviews with Monckton, Professor Ian Plimer and Professor Carter. You may contact her for a set at thegreatclimatescam@gmail.com. 
The audio of the debate is online: http://media01.couriermail.com.au/multim...ml?id=1418 but it doesn`t contain the extra interviews

Case Smit and John Smeed deserve our sincere gratitude in organising and underwriting the tour. Thanks Fellas.
===========
More International Climate Sceptic speakers will be visiting Australia this year

We are currently inviting two other highly regarded overseas Climate Sceptic speakers to Australia to speak at public meetings later this year. More details when dates are finalised.
Let us know if you are interested in helping host an event in your town or city. We want to get the message out as far and wide as we can so the earlier we know you want an event in your town, the better we can plan a tour.
===========


SA Climate Sceptic Candidate Nathan Ashby has been endorsed as the independent Climate sceptic candidate for South Australia. He is getting a few media interviews and creating a bit of buzz. Here is Nathans latest Comments sent to the media:

"Climate Sceptic Candidate calls for Australia to follow India's lead and abandon IPCC.
Following India's decision to form its own panel to review the science of climate change, there are calls for Australia to do the same.


"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been shown to be untrustworthy,. It has got the facts wrong on the Himalayan glaciers, the Amazon forest, the Netherlands area below sea level, the African rainfall projections and has scientists submitting fraudulent science. We in Australia need to perform our own assessment of the climate science," said Nathan Ashby, who is standing for election in the South Australian Legislative Council as an Independent Climate Sceptic.


The IPCC is facing increasing pressure as India has announced it will set up its own climate change review panel, to hand down its findings in November. This is following revelations that the IPCC's most recent report relied on sources including a magazine article, a student essay, and campaign material from environmental groups, to make dramatic claims with no scientific basis.


"We need to have a fair and objective review of the climate science, and the IPCC has not provided that," said Mr Ashby.


"It's crucial that the Australian climate change review includes safeguards for accuracy that the IPCC does not. This would include a requirement to use only peer-reviewed scientific literature, and that all conclusions be directly supported by the scientific papers cited. The IPCC has been accepting material from groups like WWF and Greenpeace that appears to be pure propaganda.."

nathan.ashby@climatesceptics.com.au
ph 0422513651


NSW Property Rights Rallys

Jeanette & Bob Jones are co hosting Coo - Eee Rallys in support of Property rights (many property rights have been reduced by the Kyoto Protocol and other legislation over the last decade)

Dates, Venue's, Times are:-
TAMWORTH 11th Feb' West Tamworth Leagues Club, "Blazes Showroom", 7pm
ARMIDALE 12th Feb' Armidale City Bowling Club, "Tops Room", 7pm
Joint Coo--eee Committee 13th Feb' Armidale Anglican Church Hall, "BRAINSTORM" 10am Committee Rep's from 13 Chapter's only
MACKSVILLE 16th Feb' Macksville RSL Club, " Functions Room" 7pm
KEMPSEY 17th Feb' Kempsey RSL Club, "Auditorium" 7pm


Email jeanette47@bigpond.com or jonesb@y7mail.com
Jeanette Jones, Coffs Harbour.
=============

Wrong Insulation being installed by Govts

Tim Renouf, secretary of the foil insulation, is trying to get crucial questions asked at the Senate Inquiry – Home Insulation Program. He says that the wrong insulations are going into houses at tax-payers expense, in particular, bulk fibre insulations in ceilings QLD & NSW and all Australian dominant hot climate locations. Conversely, foil insulations stop radiation entering buildings, bulk insulations do not and make house hotter. If you are interested in helping or wish to know more of the subject, please contact:


Tim Renouf
Wren Industries P/L
139 Herald St, Cheltenham VIC 3192
tel: 03 9532-5855 mob:0417-310523
info@concertinafoilbatts.com
http://www.concertinafoilbatts.com/

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


A poll on "Do you support Kevin Rudd's ETS proposal?"
78% of people agree on one answer - guess what it is?
Here is the website:- http://au.news.yahoo.com/polls/popup/-/poll_id/51862


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

Dr. Miklos Zagoni has drawn our attention to the fact that Science has published a paper by Susan Solomon stating that the water vapor content of the stratosphere decreased by about 10 % in the past decade:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/ab...ce.1182488


"They can’t explain this decrease, but we regard it as the first independent observational proof of the Miskolczi theory".says Dr Zagoni
===================

The Federal Government cannot guarantee that its controversial climate plan will cut Australia's greenhouse gas emissions at all. Government data appears to show that under the ETS, Australia's emissions would rise from 553 million tonnes in 2000 to 585 million tonnes by 2020.


Full article at: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/emi...5828024758

===============
Evidence Greens are against a wealthier society


On other interesting news, allow me to give you a juicy quote from a recent edition of the BBC Radio 4's "Analysis" program :


"Towsend: I was making a speech to nearly 200 really hard core, deep environmentalists and I played a little thought game on them. I said imagine I am the
carbon fairy and I wave a magic wand. We can get rid of all the carbon in the atmosphere, take it down to two hundred fifty parts per million and I will ensure
with my little magic wand that we do not go above two degrees of global warming. However, by waving my magic wand I will be interfering with the laws of physics not with people – they will be as selfish, they will be as desiring of status. The cars will get bigger, the houses will get bigger, the planes will fly all over the place but there will be no climate change. And I asked them, would you ask the fairy to wave its magic wand? And about 2 people of the 200 raised their hands”.


You may find the rest of the script here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/..._01_10.txt
================
More News from around the world see http://www.thehowardherald.id.au/page4.html



Until the next time,


Regards,


Leon Ashby
Info@climatesceptics.com.au
PH: 0887 235 550

Climate Sceptics News & Views - 17th Feb



Hi everyone:



As the fallout from climate gate and the IPCC exaggerations continues, public support has dropped for an ETS.
The noises from Canberra are that the ETS will not get support in the senate,
however the debate on climate and CO2 is far from over.


Here are some interesting articles for those interested:

Tim Ball has written a good summary explaining the wide variation in the distance from the sun to the earth
i.e. orbital eccentricity, obliquity and precession. It has implications for to the variations in earth Temperatures. http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/20029


A video on why the IPCC temps are unreliable - An explanation using Canadian temperatures
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OjPJnEtfUE


The latest on Phil Jones from the Climate Research Unit (Climate gate)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/articl...ON-SUNDAY-
COMMENT-The-professors-amazing-climate-change-retreat.html#ixzz0fVexYfDV



Dr John Christy is getting quoted about his work on global temperatures and how they do not show warming:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/en...026317.ece


The Next Climate-gate?

The global warming scandal keeps getting worse.
But probably the most damaging report has come from Joseph D'Aleo,
the first Director of Meteorology and co-founder of the Weather Channel, and
Anthony Watts, a meteorologist and founder of SurfaceStations.org.
In a January 29 report, they find that starting in 1990, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
began systematically eliminating climate measuring stations in cooler locations around the world.
Yes, that's right.
They began eliminating stations that tended to record cooler temperatures and drove up the average measured temperature.
The eliminated stations had been in higher latitudes and altitudes, inland areas away from the sea, as well as more rural locations.
The drop in the number of weather stations was dramatic, declining from more than 6,000 stations to fewer than 1,500.
For the full report see http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images...e_temp.pdf


IPCC lead author says this

“The Nobel prize was for peace not science … government employees will use it to negotiate changes and a redistribution of resources.
It is not a scientific analysis of climate change,” said Anton Imeson, a former IPCC lead author from the Netherlands.
“For the media, the IPCC assessments have become an icon for something they are not.
To make sure that it does not happen again, the IPCC should change its name and become part of something else.
The IPCC should have never allowed itself to be branded as a scientific organisation.
It provides a review of published scientific papers but none of this is much controlled by independent scientists.”
Read more here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/20...pcc-reform
or http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/12721


Heartland Conference in Chicago May 16th - 18th

Speakers- 58 confirmed speakers and panelist so far. They include
two former astronauts, some of the leading scientists in America and around the world,
and economists and policy experts who are leading the battle for sound science.

Cosponsors- 46 organisations from around the world are assisting with the conference.
You can see the current list at
http://www.heartland.org/events/2010Chic...nsors.html

Attendance – Plans are for about 900 people to attend, pre-registration has already passed 150.
This is the first major conference for “skeptics” since the Climategate scandal broke,
and since the collapse of negotiations in Copenhagen!


We (The Climate Sceptics political party) are also a co sponsor so we can have 20 people attend for free.
Let me know if you wish to be one of those. You will need to get to Chicago yourself though.
Jane & I will be in attending.


Michael Rowley asks - What can we do for sending up Earth Hour?

The Green movement encourages lights off as a way to save the planet from CO2 emissions.
Has anyone got ideas that we could do in a few cities while the community is turning off it`s lights?
Please send in your ideas and we will publicise them in the next newsletter.
Maybe we could organise something public and fun that sends up the whole idea.


CD summary of the AGW issue an Excellent resource

Leon,
Last week I attended Lord Monckton’s presentation at the Hotel Sofitel in Melbourne.
In the foyer I purchased a CD for $10.00 which I think was produced by your organization, and
regard it as one of the best investments that I have ever made.
Congratulations your definitive work has been well worth the effort.
I have spent 6 hours studying the contents and regard is a the complete answer
to analyzing the factors effecting climate change. I am so far still only up to slide 105.
I want to recommend the purchase
Regards,
Len Williams
Contact michaelspencer2@bigpond.com for copies of this excellent summary with oodles of links


Climate Sceptic Stickers that say "Global Warming is mainly Hot Air"" are available from
Doug Giddings, PO Box 140, Glenelg SA 5045.
Phone 08 8294 2767 for individual or bulk orders. dougdawn@adam.com.au

How you can assist the Climate Sceptic movement

* Write letters to the editor expressing your views

* Chat on talkback radio.

* Present Climate sceptic powerpoints at a community group
- They can be downloaded from
http://www.climatesceptics.com.au/about-us/resources/

* Email powerpoint to contacts.

* Join the Climate sceptics party (http://www.climatesceptics.com.au) and
assist with promotions, and suporting candidates.

* Donate funds to TV ad campaigns or the Party i.e.
Westpac BSB 035612 A/C 239469 The climate Sceptics

* letter box drop the leaflet in your area.


Till next time
Cheers

Leon Ashby

President The Climate Sceptics
PO, Box 721, Mt Gambier SA 5290
Ph 0887259561 or 0887235550
info@climatesceptics.com.au

http://www.climatesceptics.com.au/

(02-09-2010 11:01 AM)Derek Wrote: [ -> ]Hi Everyone:


I'm happy to inform that Lord Monckton’s tour of Australia has been a massive success.
Just about every appearance has been sold out.
Last Saturday’s was so popular that not even local MPs could get a seat:
http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/sto...ge-debate/


For those that have been meaning to hear him speak, his final appearance will be
on Feb.12th at the Sydney Hilton Hotel 12.30 pm where he will debate lecturer Tim Lambert.
More information about this attached.


If you weren’t able to make it to Lord Monckton’s visits, and are not able to make it to the upcoming one in Sydney, do not despair. For anyone interested, Leah Hobbs is offering DVD sets of Lord Monckton’s Brisbane visits for $35 each. The DVDs will include over two hours of one on one interviews with Monckton, Professor Ian Plimer and Professor Carter. You may contact her for a set at thegreatclimatescam@gmail.com. 
The audio of the debate is online: http://media01.couriermail.com.au/multim...ml?id=1418 but it doesn`t contain the extra interviews

That's good to hear..."massive success". You can almost feel the momentum building.

I'm curious...what do you think of Ian Plimer? I read his book and enjoyed it very much. But I saw him in a debate recently and he came off very poorly in my view. I've only seen that one so it could have been a bad day for him.

Quote:Evidence Greens are against a wealthier society


On other interesting news, allow me to give you a juicy quote from a recent edition of the BBC Radio 4's "Analysis" program :


"Towsend: I was making a speech to nearly 200 really hard core, deep environmentalists and I played a little thought game on them. I said imagine I am the
carbon fairy and I wave a magic wand. We can get rid of all the carbon in the atmosphere, take it down to two hundred fifty parts per million and I will ensure
with my little magic wand that we do not go above two degrees of global warming. However, by waving my magic wand I will be interfering with the laws of physics not with people – they will be as selfish, they will be as desiring of status. The cars will get bigger, the houses will get bigger, the planes will fly all over the place but there will be no climate change. And I asked them, would you ask the fairy to wave its magic wand? And about 2 people of the 200 raised their hands”.

I've tried that myself.

Just ask a hard-core environmentalist if they would support a new invention that rid us of all CO2 emissions and allowed us to go on using fossil fuels just as we are with no harm. (I use their language and assume there actually is some "harm") They are very cool to that idea.

So it's the "punishment for sins" that they are really interested in. That's where the religion raises its head. I also sense a strong desire to do some sort of damage to "big oil". That's been an enemy so long it appears they can't stomach any scenario that lets them off without pain.

Re - "punishment for their sins" - Yes, it is difficult to try to reason someone out of a position that,
they did not get reasoned into in the first place...

Re - Ian Plimer - I have a copy of his book, but I have not read it yet (oooh the shame..),
I assume he is of the "classical" sceptics position. But, he is a geologist..
(Geology is not all innocent either with regards to dismissing good observation - ie, Wegener)

Me, I'm more a "revolutionary" (there needs to be a paradigm change) climate science sceptic...
ie, Greenhouse effect "theory" is crock.

Certainly G/house does need a number of misconceptions to be swallowed wholesale,
so if both "mainstream" sides of the "discussions" are argueing from a false basis (G/house),
is it any wonder they are getting nowhere.....

(02-20-2010 10:43 PM)Derek Wrote: [ -> ]Re - "punishment for their sins" - Yes, it is difficult to try to reason someone out of a position that,
they did not get reasoned into in the first place...

Re - Ian Plimer - I have a copy of his book, but I have not read it yet (oooh the shame..),
I assume he is of the "classical" sceptics position. But, he is a geologist..
(Geology is not all innocent either with regards to dismissing good observation - ie, Wegener)

Me, I'm more a "revolutionary" (there needs to be a paradigm change) climate science sceptic...
ie, Greenhouse effect "theory" is crock.

Certainly G/house does need a number of misconceptions to be swallowed wholesale,
so if both "mainstream" sides of the "discussions" are argueing from a false basis (G/house),
is it any wonder they are getting nowhere.....

Good point there. If indeed the entire concept is flawed, it would amount to two groups debating whether a red ball is green or blue.

Plimer spent most of the book pointing out climate history from a geologists point of view and why it doesn't support AGW. The problem for me later is when George Monbiot accused him of doing what the IPCC did (using flawed sources) he couldn't seem to answer. He in fact actively evaded the question. Here is the video. (skip to the 7:30 mark and further to see what I'm talking about) Plimer does not do well in my opinion. Maybe he is just a horrible debater because one of the points (the lack of warming in the last decade) is actually admitted to by Phil Jones recently. Plimer somehow couldn't make the point.

Re - Monbiot Monbiot was allowed to question, assert, interupt (numerous times), and respond to Plimers answers.
Plimer was allowed to answer only.

In part 2 onwards the interviewer had not only researched the questions (fair enough), and the answers before hand (how did he know the answers), he also interrupted Plimer.
He also lead Monbiot in, on several questions, and never corrected Monbiot's rants and insults.
Monbiot was allowed to bully Plimer, it is as simple as that,
on subjects he is supposed to be the journalist on, and Plimer the scientist...

In short, both journalists ganged up upon Plimer, Monbiot was allowed to play judge, jury, and executioner,
it smells of a set up to me.
Monbiot was publicly showing (and given a platform to do so) he is still in with the "in" crowd.
Plimer did not really stand a chance, but actually did quite well,
Monbiot / interviewer were obviously biased and intending to bring down Plimer.

Part 2,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7y6xJbcW...re=related

Part 3,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPdhUdF6S...re=related

I should have mentioned to watch all 3 parts.

I just kept getting the sense Plimer was avoiding questions and allowing Monbiot an opening to point that out. I wanted the answers to those questions myself.

Any questions specifically, I / we could have a go at answering them.

Plimer overall remained very cool in my opinion,
Monbiot was patently trying to get him to react,
with the support of the interviewer.

I say Well done Dr. Plimer.
Although I suspect he would say he should of answered better.

Climate Sceptics News & Views. March 5th B1

Dear Climate Sceptics News & Views readers,

Hi everyone - this is just to keep you informed on a few issues in case you want to assist us.

Anthony Watts (the founder of the "Watts up with That " Blog and researcher of weather station records worldwide) is
considering coming to speak in Australia for a tour over a few weeks - possibly in June.

We would like him to visit as many cities as possible and include many outside the capitals.
If you are interested in helping organise an event in your area, please let me know.
Generally It would involved finding a suitable venue and assisting with a small team collecting tickets
during the evening and driving the speakers to their hotel / motel.
We would look after bookings for each event and paying expenses etc.

Anthony Watts will only be speaking where we have local organisers assisting us
so let us know if you are keen to assist..

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

The TV ad attached is for you to distribute to friends via email. This one is on TV in Adelaide at the moment.
The ABC talkback show featured the ad on their show on Tuesday and they were a bit overwhelmed with it, not knowing how to react..

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

Call for Senate candidates in each State

We are now calling for Senate candidates in each state, so
If a very good candidate or three puts their hand up in each state,
we will then interview all candidates and make a decision on
their position on the ticket as soon as we can.

We don`t expect all candidate positions to be filled for all states at this time, but
several potential candidates want to get cracking raising funds etc, so
we want to assist with endorsing those ready to go.
Kevin Rudd has not ruled out a double dissolution
- I think it will be a more likely chance after June (if at all)

We have 6 nominations so far
- Chris Dawson and John Costella have put their hand up for the Victorian Senate.

We should have our name above the line as a registered party
so that should give us some good publicity.

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

Feel free to check out our new look web site at http://www.climatesceptics.com.au

There are several new powerpoints on it worth a look.

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

Also just to keep informed see Climate Sceptics News from around the world:
http://www. thehowardherald.id.au/page4. html

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

Cheers for now

Leon Ashby
President The Climate Sceptics
PO, Box 721, Mt Gambier SA 5290
Ph 0887259561 or 0887235550
info@climatesceptics.com.au
http://www.climatesceptics. com.au/

Climate Sceptics News & Views March 17th A1

Can you assist getting a full & open debate on the ABC?- Climate Sceptics

Dear friends and readers,

Recently the chairman of the ABC Mr Maurice Newman said
the media should put forward the climate sceptic view more to the public.

We agree and are now encouraging the public and
our members who are concerned about the issue to email both
the ABC board
board@your.abc.net.au
&
the ABC programs e.g. mediawatch@your.abc.net.au,

lateline@your.abc.net.au or

QandA@your.abc.net.au

to consider a full and open scientific debate on the ABC.

Our Executive will be asking the ABC to give Australia programs where the actual scientific evidence
- see attachment as an example - (not just opinions) can be aired Australia wide.

We want to encourage everyone who can to write a brief email to any or all these ABC groups
to campaign for a fairly organised program (or two).
We are calling for debates or presentations that shows CO2 is the cause or not.
We do not want bland comments explaining a loose correlation such as the CSIRO has stated Listen to MP3 of this story ( minutes)

We are suggesting Prof Bob Carter or Prof Stewart Franks be considered on one side
of such a TV program and Chris Ulhmann as compere.
David Karoly and Will Steffan might be suitable opponents.

Could you join us in this campaign today and Email your view to the ABC.

Also If you agree with this campaign, Please forward this email to your contacts.

Thank you very much

Leon Ashby
President The Climate Sceptics
PO, Box 721 , Mt Gambier SA 5290
Ph 0887259561 or 0887235550
info@climatesceptics.com.au

http://www.climatesceptics. com.au

I've sent this in.

Dear Sir / Madam,

I understand that you are asking for questions / debating points regarding AGW / the greenhouse effect.

May I offer what follows.

I have recently been trying to understand the kiehl / Trenberth Global heat movement budgets,

more usually referred to as the IR budgets.

Please see this post / thread for my laymans reasoning / questioning / understanding.

http://www.globalwarmingskeptics.info/fo...d-609.html



I hope I have reasonably raised some important questions that need a more public airing,

and would sum up the posts questions as below.



It is amazing that IR budgets have been considered useful for so long by so many.
The IR budgets are worse than bunkum because,

1)The viewpoint used in IR budgets is simply wrong for what they try to depict and describe. At best the viewpoint used is misleading,
but more likely the view is partial and inaccurate, being an instant and 2D view of a 24 hour and 3D planet.

2) They completely misrepresent the real heat movements, depiciting
a ludicrous and physically impossible scene where radiation (the slowest form of heat flow) dominates conduction, convection, and latent heat movements.

3) They hide / misrepresent the individual and comparative sizes of the various heat flows.

4) They do not take into account the temperature and the effects of the relative temperatures of the heat flows.

I do not think any of the above points are minor, but, no one seems to have noticed...

AGW would have a difficult time without the K/T IR budgets, as would the present versions of the greenhouse effect so called "theory",
I wonder if that is the reason/s why "no one" has, or has been allowed, to notice.



yours, an English factory worker,

Derek Alker.

Climate Sceptics - News and Views - May 3rd

Hi everyone - Lots of things to check out in this edition,

With the ETS not being a major political issue this coming federal election, the Climate Sceptics party is deciding
principles, policies and a name change ready for release in a months time.
The principles are attached if you are interested in our progress.

“One of the penalties for not taking an interest in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors”. - Plato 400BC

Also an article on Political correctness and past predictions for the end of the world etc are attached for some fun reading
==========
Check these latest Glenn Beck videos on the meshing of banks strategies, and carbon trading systems being planned.
It is very interesting information.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUtuDGDtT...r_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG4YX90ug...r_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nz4_UZJi9...r_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QOA9C_DO...r_embedded

=======
Radio Debate on Climate change

Here is a radio interview debate between alarmist David Appell against sceptic climatologist Dr. Tim Ball
on The Victoria Taft Show on 5/11/09 on Portland, Oregon Radio KPAM,Interview -here, in 4 parts.

=========
The ETS is not dead
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/its-no...-tj3v.html
=============
Gold Coast Businesses encouraged to get ready for ETS
The Qld Govt is running 2 free workshops with light refreshments at a Country Club on the Gold Coast in early May for local business people to attend.
The workshop addresses the introduction of new legislation and taxes associated with carbon emissions.
There are obviously no plans to change direction by federal or state government and no doubt that this issue will be re introduced.
http://www.nccarf.edu.au/conference2010/...ical-2.pdf
===============
Vic Govt Propaganda Lectures

Alfred Deakin Lectures will be held in Melbourne from June 6-12 under the title of Brave New World? The Climate Change Challenge.

These lectures, which are free are sponsored by the Victorian Government and
of the 30 “best people addressing the climate problem now”,
the Alfred Deakin lecturers all appear to be warmists and include
Premier John Brumby, UK High Commissioner Baroness Valerie Amos, Malcolm Turnbull and Nick McKim.
There are no sceptics and reflects the continuing fight back by the many politicians and governments, bureaucrats and academics
who have locked themselves into the belief that the earth faces a dangerous period of warming
unless governments act to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

=========

Obama still on track for a Cap & Trade (ETS)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/20...mate-talks

=========

Nasa-Gate

Judicial Watch in America have obtained, under Freedom of Info, correspondence from
NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies showing the email correspondance
which demonstrates biased work on climate research.


http://agmates.ning.com/group/climatscep...sagissgate


http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot....sgate.html

============
The Italian Senate stands for climate realism.
A motion passed on last Wednesday commits the Italian government to promote
a sound discussion on climate policies with the European Union and the United Nations, with
particular regard to the major changes that have occurred after the economic recession, the Climategate scandal, and
the failure to reach a global deal in Copenhagen.
In fact, the Senate asks both that the current commitments under the EU climate and energy package are re-negotiated, and
that an independent investigation is started on the IPCC process.
--Carlo Stagnaro, Istituto Bruno Leoni, 18 April 2010
Link added by Derek at GWS.
http://www.thegwpf.org/international-new...ience.html

================
No more hiding the Data?

Scientists at Queen’s University in Belfast have been ordered to hand over
40 years of research data on tree rings after a three-year battle with climate sceptics.
The ruling by the Information Commissioner sets a precedent for scientists
having to comply with the strictest interpretation of the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act.
It suggests that in future academics will not be able to avoid handing over data by
claiming that the task would be too onerous or that it would breach intellectual property rights.
--Hannah Devlin, The Times, 20 April 2010
Link added by Derek at GWS.
http://www.thegwpf.org/climategate/841-u...-data.html
and a better article on the subject I have also found,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/20...ta-victory
===========

New Novel "EDENS PRIME" features environmental deception.

Check it out if you like novels with strong parallels to the climate change environmental issue. Its Andy Semple`s second novel.

http://www.andylsemple.com/index.php?page_id=7

===========

Is the world heading for a cooler decade?

David Archibald will accompany Anthony Watts on an Australia wide tour in June.
He will present evidence that shows the globe is heading for a cooler decade similar to the Dalton and Maunder minimums.
If you don`t know what effect these periods had on the planet - see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalton_Minimum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

And don`t miss the Anthony Watts tour (dates and venues to be announced soon)

=========

More on the Greenpeace activist who threatens global warming sceptics - report here

http://www.philosophical-investigations....al_Warming

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

This Report shows biofuels are not as helpful as many think.

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/...9220100421

- ===========

Solar power fraud
(Operators paid for night time solar generation)

Dear Leon,

I found the item in the newsletter about wind energy very interesting.
A friend in Europe has told me of the recent Spanish solar power fraud, which I hadn't heard about.
See
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04...ation.html and

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/13/th...-greenery/ and

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-blog...075/posts.

Cheers,
Jean
==============
A Guide to Climate Change Lunacy - Book release soon

Leon

One point consistently overlooked in the debate on carbon emissions and global warming is
that the emission scenarios issued 10 years ago by the IPCC are faring badly against real world data.

Much of the debate has concentrated on temperature changes and how the actual changes fall short of dire forecasts, but
before climate modellers can make those forecasts they need forecasts of
the concentrations of CO2 and methane (the two big greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere.
(Derek notes - I assume that they are meaning "man made or emitted" GHG's, we ALL know water vapour IS the biggest GHG
but there again, man emits a lot of water vapour as well, so I'm left a bit confused by
"concentrations of CO2 and methane (the two big greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere")

Those projections depend on partly on economics – what will the Chinese economy be doing in 50 years and
how does it compare with the US economy?
– and partly on what scientists think they know about how long these gases hang around in the atmosphere.
The eventual result of all this computer modeling, including straight guessing on the economics side of it, was a host of scenarios,
all considered equally likely, contained in the Special Report on Emission Scenarios issued in 2000.

The scenarios are for gigatonnes of CO2 emitted but an attachment to the 2001 IPCC report
gives the result in parts per million for CO2 and parts per billion for Methane.

As is immediately apparent, the projections for methane are already hopelessly wrong.
The lowest projection for Methane for 2010 is 1,839 parts per billion (the forecast is given in 10 year increments), and
the highest is for nearly 2000.
But the actual result for 2009 was about 1,780.
This result can be seen on a graph compiled by the NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colorado.
NOAA stands for the North American Office of Atmospheric Administration. Web site

The forecasts for CO2 concentrations are better, but still short of the horror story the IPCC wants to sell.
In 2009 CO2 concentrations were about 387 parts per million (0.0387 per cent of air),
which is a little ahead of the lowest of the IPCC projections I could find, 381 ppm.
But the mid range projections are mostly above 390 ppm and the highest is nearly 400 ppm.
That is just nine years of data for projections meant to run over a century but, of course, that data comes from the real world.
What seems to have happened is that the projections assume that
the increases in concentrations seen before the forecast would continue and increase.
They didn't.

Another interesting point about all of this is that various pronouncements at the Copenhagen indicate that
the policy makers are still setting (ineffectual) emissions targets under the assumption that
concentrations of these gases in the atmosphere are running at the top of forecasts rather than near or below the bottom.

These and a host of other problems with the IPCC led global warming push explored in my book
‘A Guide to Climate Change Lunacy – bad forecasting, terrible solutions’
(Connor Court, RRP: $29.95), to be released in the first week in June.

Mark Lawson
Journalist/Reports Editor
The Australian Financial Review
=================

Another thing that is missing on an ETS debate is perspective.
- Peter Cunningham

The combination of Australia and NZ population is 0.37142857% of the entire world.

Australia & NZ energy saving via light globes and suchlike can mean diddly squat and so will destroying our economies via an ETS.

Most of the money will go to carbon traders
They can sell something which cannot be measured, counted or weighed.
ETS will depend purely on "estimates" and rough guesses.
It reminds me about the middle ages, when you could buy total absolution for you sins from the local priest.
We pay the Government and carbon traders for something which cannot be verified or justified.
What a beautiful business to buy and sell gas which you don't own.

Costs that will be borne by us the tax-payer
Based on a working population (10.6 million), a carbon price of $A225 would correspond to a cost per working person of
more than $A12,000 per year, or around 25 per cent of the average after-tax earnings.

Even if we halve our per-capita emissions by 2030, the cost would still be at least $6,000 each year per working person.

The Governments massive home insulation scheme to comply with the commitments they made to the UN in relation to ETS (etc) - was a cockup of monumental proportions.
And people believe they can trust governments with ETS?

It has been said that the loonies are running the asylum - nothing could be more accurate.
I can see very clearly now why governments don't want people to have guns!
Peter Cunningham

==========

Heartland International Climate Change Conference
- Chicago - May 16th - 18th

A number of Australians will be going to the Chicago conference including myself and my wife Jane.
Places are still open if you want to attend. Email me for details.

Cheers for Now
Leon Ashby
President The Climate Sceptics
PO, Box 721, Mt Gambier SA 5290
Ph 0887259561 or 0887235550
info@climatesceptics.com.au
http://www.climatesceptics.com.au/

Climate Sceptics News & Views - 12th Aug

Dear Readers,

In this newsletter I will feature a lot of video links that are making points relevant to the election.

First a big thank you to everyone who has donated funds to the TV campaign.
It is awesome to have lots of $20 - $100 donations coming in.
We have also had a couple of big $5,000 donations.

We are very appreciative of everyone's help.
Every few days we are increasing the advertising what we are doing with the campaign especially in SA and Tasmania
where we have our best chances in the senate.

A couple of members of the campaign team say I have a very real chance of being elected in SA.

So to maximize our chances, I am asking if anyone can help us with
handing out "How to vote" cards in SA on Election Day.
If so let me know. Anyone coming from interstate can bunk at my place.

Cheers

Leon Ashby

A few interesting articles and videos

http://www. independentaustralia.net/2010/ politics/every-vote-is- precious/ - Mark Aldridge comments on Democracy (the lack of it)

http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=XpxZv9aab1Q Anti greens fishing ad

http://www.thinkbeforeyouvote. com.au/ - Master Builders Association anti greens campaign

George Pell speaks out against the greens http://www.abc.net.au/news/ stories/2010/08/10/2979361.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=MMGPLdNcf-o property rights removal explained.

http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=z_6fyaFc5Cs Property Rights Rally - Sydney

http://terrycardwellsblog. blogspot.com/ Renewable and Power generation - the future by Terry Cardwell (Qld senate candidate)

http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=SXfD9olU2_o&feature=related 17 year olds letter about removal of rights for farmers

http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=pHNNlN46By0&NR=1 Wind power problems ad (5,000 views in the last week)

http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=KD-hGW1KQto&NR=1 Green laws are destroying Australia . (our main TV ad being played across SA & Tas)

http://climatesceptics.net/? page_id=1288 Climate Sceptics policies

Letter to newspapers by Leon Ashby on Water Development
- (A new PDF will be put on our web site explaining our policies)
- See http://www.climatesceptics.com.au

Following the major parties promises on River Murray, as a senate candidate,
I want to explain how there is plenty of water in Australia and rather than support a water buy back policy for the River Murray,
I believe diverting water from Northern Australian rivers is the solution for extra water to SA.

Rivers such as the Clarence, Tully, Herbert, Burdekin, and Flinders in northern Australia have vast amounts flow into the sea during floods.

These floods could be diverted to flow to many places inland including as far south as Murray Bridge via gravity fed pipelines and channels."

Six times the total of the Murray Darling water runs out to sea into the gulf of Carpentaria each year, but
there is no need to relocate communities along the Murray river to northern Australia,
just use the funds promised for the ETS and water buybacks into building a visionary inland water system that
provides a win win for farmers, cities and the environment. It would help populate inland Australia rather than decimate it
like the green ideology all major parties espouse to a greater or lesser degree.

Green ideology says no dams, no diversions, no development, and no common sense.

The River Murray went dry 4 times in the early 1900s before weir and locks were built.
How many times has it gone dry historically and the environment still survived?

Our party believes climate change is cyclical not man made,
prosperity is necessary for our society to thrive and
environmental flows should cease when droughts occur so our rural communities can survive the tough times.
Governments picking off the smaller farming communities and towns and removing their rights and ability to survive needs to stop.
We hope people vote in such a way to achieve this.

Leon Ashby

President The Climate Sceptics & SA lead senate candidate

In several important respects, I find this newsletter contains some very saddening comments and observations..

Climate Sceptics News - 26th Aug

Hi Everyone,
A quick report on the election. As you will have seen the next Australian parliament is in limbo waiting to see who the independents will work with to run the country for the next term.
The Climate Sceptic vote in the senate was very low - 0.2% to 0.45%. We had a TV ad campaign that we thought would become topical or controversial with the content we had in them. They were broadcast in SA and Tasmania but it didn`t stir the issue at all. I thought we should have at least been the butt of some media jokes with the ads we made.
Steve Davies in Barker in SA did get a reaction with some of his humorous comments being reported in SA local media . For his efforts he got 1.7% of the vote.
I did get phone calls from our TV ads - When I questioned one caller about CO2 - he didn`t know it was used in soft drink, beer or came out our lungs - He thought I was lying about these facts.

Our candidates and executive have been discussing the outcome and we believe we did everything as well as we could have for the election. Plenty of press releases, some great comments by candidates forceful ads. Except for green voters, the climate debate did not seem that important to anyone else.
One good bit of good news is an independent senator (DLP) looks like getting elected in Victoria while Family First are still a slight chance in SA too. Independents are seemingly the best way public debates can broaden out.
As an example Independent Bob Katter is making similar comments about rural suicides and loss of rights to one of our TV ads and is starting to get some debate on these subjects. Over the last decade, the gagging of Coalition and Labor MPs by the parties has made our system an elected dictatorship. Hopefully the rise of independents could change that.

One thing is for sure, the debate on a Carbon tax or an ETS is sure to hot up again. Naturally we will be doing what we can to publicise the fact science shows CO2 does not causing excessive Global warming. One of our Lawyer members is now looking for someone to sue to attempt to get the issue dealt with. Others in the party are discussing other options too. The feeling from my colleagues is that we in the party have a mission and one way or another we aim to get a result.

I will be explaining various ideas to our members soon.

My thanks to everyone who donated funds for the campaign. It was an honor to have so many people chip in to help. All of us working in the campaign were very appreciative.
From a leadership role I found our team was very good to work with. We have some very good candidates who think deep and hard and I`m sure will look at future elections as well.

Leon Ashby - President The Climate Sceptics

Here are some links you might find interesting

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/origin...onned.html John McLean`s latest research on the lack of transparency in the climate debate

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/26603 satellite gate (faulty readings from satellites) looks like being the next news to cause doubt on Global temperature records

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MLRaGThx3I Michael Cejnar has put this video together as a creative way to communicate issues.

http://www.youtube.com/user/PropertyRightsAustr Property rights Australia has a bunch of videos explaining how green laws are destroying Australia.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andre...ectricity/ - Your electricity prices will rise further

========

Alan Jones talks to Rodney Hyde – New Zealand MP on the impact of an ETS…..

Download the interview here http://www.2gb.com/podcasts/alanjones/al...120810.mp3

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

Sceptics to challenge climate science in court
Climate change sceptics in New Zealand are taking the government's climate agency to court over the validity of its evidence on global warming.

The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition has accused the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research of tampering with official weather records to make the case for global warming.

The Coalition's chairman Barry Brill says the calculations are wrong and should not be relied upon.

"In terms of the New Zealand temperature record I'm saying that's totally inaccurate and needs to be completely vacated and redone," he said.

Several of New Zealand's climate change scientists say the temperature records show a clear warming trend consistent with what has been measured by thousands of meteorological stations around the world.

==========

Debate on Emissions trading at Brisbane 7th October - Malcolm Roberts to give Climate Sceptic position

On 7 October 2010, the New Farm Neighbourhood Centre will present 'Fiddling While Rome Burns: Does Australia Need and Emissions Trading Scheme?'

Turbine Platform, Brisbane Powerhouse 6-7.30 pm

A Greens senator and a WWF speakers have been invited also

More details? - ph Nick Collyer
0432061733


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

“Today’s debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom. The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and impossible) aspect of our lives.”

Vaclav Klaus - Blue Planet in Green Shackles

Rising sea of irresponsibility
by Des Moore & Tom Quirk

August 23, 2010

What is the risk of sea level increases?

Although there was little debate during the election about climate change policies, a lot of action has been going on behind the scenes on sea levels. This reflects the acceptance by our governments of questionable sea level projections in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007 Fourth Assessment Report and even of extensions of these projections to unrealistic levels on advice from the CSIRO. This has led State planning authorities and councils to start introducing restrictions on property development in low lying areas and the associated fall in seaside prices in some areas has been reflected in downward official valuations of such properties.

In Victoria, for instance, the development issue went to VCAT and it refused permission for a small beachside project at Lakes Entrance. At the VCAT hearing reference was made to a federal government report warning that up to 44,600 Victorian homes could be destroyed by 2100 by rising sea levels.

Careful analysis of the sea level situation indicates, however, that the risk of extensive flooding of low lying areas in Australia is remote and that State governments and councils are behaving irresponsibly. Indeed those holding developable land in many low lying areas may have a legal case for challenging decisions such as the VCAT one.

Let us look at the basis on which sea level projections have been made.

First, based on a “series of scenarios” of the future and its best-guess temperature projection of 2.4-4.5C degrees to 2100 unless countervailing action is taken, the 2007 IPCC report included a projected increase in average global sea levels to 2100 ranging between 18 and 59 cm.

Next, in March 2010 the CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology jointly published a State of Climate report on their assessment of the implications for Australia of the IPCC projections. The report accepts those IPCC temperature projections, concludes that the rate of global sea level rise increased in the 20th century and has an accompanying graph showing an increase of about 15 cm, or about 1.5 cm per decade. The report states that from 1993 to 2009 sea level rise has been 1.5 to 3 cm per decade in the south and east of Australia. A continuation of that rate would result in an increase to 2100 close to the lower end of the IPCC’s predicted range.

However, a 2009 report by the CSIRO for the Victorian Government’s Future Coasts Program on The Effect of Climate Change on Extreme Sea Levels in Port Phillip Bay took it much further. While it acknowledged that projections of sea levels “are inherently uncertain”, this CSIRO report based its figuring on temperature projections to 2100 of up to 6.4 degrees. That is the most extreme, fuel intensive, scenario of the IPCC and implies unbelievable CO2 concentration levels in 2100 of approximately 1550 parts per million (expressed in CO2 equivalent). Usage of all known fossil fuel reserves would only achieve half of this and continuation of the current rate of increase in concentration levels would result in only 550 ppm by 2100.

In terms of sea levels, the result is a CSIRO predicted rise for Port Phillip Bay by 2100 of 82 cm and, with the help of the Bureau of Meteorology, an increase due to wind to 98 cm. That is not only well above even the top level projected by the latest IPCC report but is also well above any projections from the last 20 to 100 years.

Such analyses have naturally drawn increased attention to possible sea level increases and low-lying flooding. The alleged threat has been enhanced by recent reports that Greenland has shed the largest slab of ice since 1962, causing one geo-science professor to attract attention by warning a US Congressional hearing on global warming that, if temperatures rose by up to 7 degrees, the Greenland ice sheet could be obliterated and sea levels could rise by 7 metres. However, a US professor of ocean science acknowledged in an interview on the ABC that he could not say “if global warming is at work or not”. Other analysts have also pointed out that the “calving” of ice from Greenland occurs regularly and that, while this one maybe four times the size of Manhattan, that would be only about 0.02 per cent of the Greenland ice sheet.

As with many analyses by scientific groups working on climate issues, the CSIRO tends to advocacy and not assessment. This leads to exaggeration of the global warming problem. In the present case the exaggerations extend beyond even those of the IPCC, whose reports are currently under review by an Inter-Academy committee in the UK. This is highlighted in the failure of the CSIRO report for the Victorian Government to express any uncertainties of projection and methodology that might suggest it is simply a computer-modelled projection.

This despite the satellite measurements of global sea levels since 1993 showing an increase of only 5 cm to 2010. A continued increase at that rate would result in a further sea level rise of 25 cm by 2100. On any reasonable assessment of likely sea levels, there is no scientific basis for restrictions on property development in low-lying coastal areas in Australia.

Des Moore is Director, Institute for Private Enterprise and Tom Quirk a sometime Oxford physicist.

============
Some brief news From the USA

The Obama administration has urged the Supreme Court to toss out an appeals court decision that would allow lawsuits against major emitters for their contributions to global warming, stunning environmentalists who see the case as a powerful prod on climate change. --Gabriel Nelson, The New York Times, 25 August 2010



We feel stabbed in the back. This was really a dastardly move by an administration that said it was a friend of the environment. With friends like this, who needs enemies? --Matt Pawa, The New York Times, 25 August 2010



A team of lawyers for Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II, a vocal skeptic of global warming, went to court Friday to further his investigation into whether former University of Virginia professor Michael Mann manipulated data to show that there has been a rapid, recent rise in the Earth's temperature. Lawyers from the attorney general's office said the climate scientist might have engaged in fraud by purposely designing his well-known "hockey-stick" graph to show global warming or including manipulated research on his curriculum vitae, which he submitted for grants. --Anita Kumar, The Washington Post, 21 August 2010



The wind industry has achieved remarkable growth largely due to the claim that it will provide major reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. There's just one problem: It's not true. --Robert Bryce, The Wall Street Journal, 24 August 2010

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

And just to change the subject a bit - A network architect for one of Australia ’s largest Telco’s - says this about the National Broadband Network

Here are the technical reasons the big $43 million dollar plan will fail :


1) fibre optic cable has a maximum theoretical lifespan of 25 years when installed in conduit. Over time, the glass actually degrades (long story), and eventually it cant do it`s bouncing of light thing any more. But when you install fibre outside on overhead wiring (as will be done for much of Australia ’s houses, except newer suburbs with underground wiring), then the fibre degrades much quicker due to wind, temperature variation and solar/cosmic radiation. The glass in this case will last no more than 15 years. So after 15 years, you will have to replace it. Whereas the copper network will last for many decades to come. Fibre is not the best technology for the last mile. That`s why no other country has done this.

2) You can not give every house 100Mbps. If you give several million households 100Mbps bandwidth, then you have exceeded the entire bandwidth of the whole internet. In reality, there is a thing called contention. Today, every ADSL service with 20Mbps has a contention ratio of around 20:1 (or more for some carriers). That means, you share that 20Mbps with 20 other people. It`s a long story why, but there will NEVER be the case of people getting 100Mbps of actual bandwidth. Not for several decades at current carrier equipment rates of evolution. The “Core” can not and will not be able to handle that sort of bandwidth. The 100Mbps or 1Gbps is only the speed from your house to the exchange. From there to the Internet, you will get the same speeds you get now. The “Core” of Australia ’s network is already fibre (many times over). And even so, we still have high contention ratios. Providing fibre to the home just means those contention ratios go up. You will not get better download speeds.

3) New DSL technologies will emerge. 15 years ago we had 56k dial-up. Then 12 years ago we got 256k ADSL, then 8 years ago 1.5Mbps ADSL2, then 5 years ago 20Mbps ADSL2+. There are already new DSL technologies being experimented on that will deliver over 50Mbps on the same copper we have now. $zero cost to the tax payer

4) 4G wireless is being standardised now. The current 3G wireless was developed for voice and not for data, and even so it can deliver up to 21Mbps in Australia . There are problems with it, but remember that it was developed for voice. The 4G standard is specifically being developed for data, and will deliver 100Mbps bandwidth with much higher reliability (yes, the same contention issues apply mentioned earlier). $zero cost to the tax payer

5) The “NBN” will be one of the largest single networks ever built on earth. There are only a few companies who could do it - Japan ’s Nippon NTT, BT, AT&T;, Deutsche Telekom etc. Even Telstra would struggle to built something on this scale. Yet we are led to believe that the same people who cant build school halls or install insulation without being ripped off are going to do it ??? Here at Telstra, we are laughing our heads off !! Because when it all comes crumbling down, after they have spent $60+billion and the network is no more than 1/2 complete, it will be up to Telstra to pick up the pieces ! (shhhh don't tell anyone, it`s our secret)


Till next time

Leon Ashby

Climate Sceptics News and Views - 6th Sept

Hi Everyone,

The SBS Insight program on climate change with the late Stephen Schneider and a (more or less) “sceptical” audience
that was recorded in June, is to be screened on Tuesday September 7th.
Several party members were in the audience. Check it out.

=====
A video on how water can be used to power cars etc is attached. Derek - My apologies I could not find an online link for this video.
I have however, found this H2O->HHO, water power - physics forums.
I am deeply saddened and disappointed by the video being included in the newsletter,
quite simply it lets the newsletter down, very badly.
This particular issue of the newsletter for the first time is not signed from Leon Ashby, maybe
that explains the "quality" issue of this newsletter in it including this waterpower video.
So, here is a you tube link I am providing upon the subject...
No, you can't run your car on water - it's a scam
AND also on this scam, another You Tube video, and a newspaper article, and FTC Sues Promoters of Bogus Fuel Efficiency Device.
The newsletter continues...
Also a Blog on the greens and effective Govt is attached Derek - Attached to this post, it is excellant.
=======

Court challenge to Niwa climate records

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/nat...te-records

NZ Climate change sceptics are taking the country's state-owned weather research body to the High Court over claims that its records are inaccurate.

The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research is being challenged about the data it uses to calculate climate change.

The court action is being funded by the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, and is the latest in a series of attacks by global warming sceptics on Niwa.
The group, funded by members and donations, said it had established a Climate Science Trust through which to file its claim, which was served last week.
It is asking the court to order that records are invalid that show a 1 degree Celsius warming trend in nationwide temperatures during the past century, and
wants Niwa to be ordered to produce another "accurate" record.
It has also asked the court to order Niwa to stop using its current records to advise any government authority or the public.
The trust's spokesman, Bryan Leyland, said policy makers were being given a one-sided view on climate change.
"We're concerned that vast amounts of money are being spent trying to fight global warming when we're convinced it's not happening."
The emissions trading scheme was just one example, and the Government needed to get an opposing view.

"They use computer models and believe in computer models. I don't believe in them. I believe in looking at data and looking at history."

=======

Just in case you have never seen a good example of the propaganda the masses get brainwashed with - here is an example from the David Letterman show
You will see it never gets to the precise facts of CO2 - Its always assumes CO2 is the cause of Global warming.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JcRj-Yok...r_embedded

(In the future we will campaign for Royal commission into the science of CO2 and climate change.
The atmospheric published research of NASA scientists Roy Spencer, & Ferenc Miskolczi and Eminent Climatologist Richard Lindzen never get examined.)
We only ask for the scientific paper and the name of a scientist that conclusively shows CO2 and other "Greenhouse Gases" will overheat the planet.
The silence is deafening.

========
A new movie is coming out on governments and money - This trailer suggests it will be very good

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wty7974IKg

====================
Carbon price collapse



The plummeting price of carbon demonstrates US carbon traders think the chances of an American 'cap and trade' scheme anytime soon are practically zero.
Here electricity prices are going up and up and up thanks to 'renewable energy targets'. Alan Moran has written about the real cost of renewable energy here and here.
(The average household uses about 9 MWh (Megawatt Hours) of electricity a year. The cost of generating 1 MWh conventionally is under $40.
The cost from a wind farm is $125 per MWh and from solar is over $400 per MWh (9 x $360 = $3240 per year extra for solar power for a household
– but how much extra on top of that for your business?)

Interesting Links to check out

"Climategate: A Veteran Meteorologist Expose the Global Warming Scam."

========

A list of what the Greens want http://www.rightjab.observationdeck.org/?p=3945

==========
Apparently the new Tasmanian Independent and ex-Green has some differences with his old party on forestry:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/...994928.htm

=======

Peter Spencer will be able to take his property rights case to court

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/...999319.htm

=====

A US politician as the US army "What are you doing to reduce emissions during war?"

http://smartgirlpolitics.ning.com/profil...pid-stupid

========

Wind Power Won't Cool Down the Planet
The wind industry has achieved remarkable growth largely due to the claim that it will provide major reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. There's just one problem: It's not true. A slew of recent studies show that wind-generated electricity likely won't result in any reduction in carbon emissions or that they'll be so small as to be almost meaningless.

Because wind blows intermittently, electric utilities must either keep their conventional power plants running all the time to make sure the lights don't go dark, or continually ramp up and down the output from conventional coal- or gas-fired generators (called "cycling"). But coal-fired and gas-fired generators are designed to run continuously, and if they don't, fuel consumption and emissions generally increase. A car analogy helps explain: An automobile that operates at a constant speed say, 55 miles per hour will have better fuel efficiency, and emit less per mile traveled, than one that is stuck in stop-and-go traffic.

Recent research strongly suggests how this problem defeats the alleged carbon-reducing virtues of wind power. In April, Bentek Energy, a Colorado-based energy analytics firm, looked at power plant records in Colorado and Texas. (It was commissioned by the Independent Petroleum Association of the Mountain States.) Bentek concluded that despite huge investments, wind-generated electricity "has had minimal, if any, impact on carbon dioxide" emissions.

Bentek found that thanks to the cycling of Colorado's coal-fired plants in 2009, at least 94,000 more pounds of carbon dioxide were generated because of the repeated cycling. In Texas, Bentek estimated that the cycling of power plants due to increased use of wind energy resulted in a slight savings of carbon dioxide (about 600 tons) in 2008 and a slight increase (of about 1,000 tons) in 2009.

Coal emits about twice as much CO2 during combustion as natural gas. But wind generation mostly displaces natural gas, because natural gas-fired generators are often the most costly form of conventional electricity production. Yet if regulators are truly concerned about reducing carbon emissions and air pollution, they should be encouraging gas-fired generation at the expense of coal. And they should be doing so because U.S. natural gas resources are now likely large enough to meet all of America's natural gas needs for a century.

Meanwhile, the wind industry is pocketing subsidies that dwarf those garnered by the oil and gas sector. The federal government provides a production tax credit of $0.022 for each kilowatt-hour of electricity produced by wind. That amounts to $6.44 per million BTU of energy produced. Wind subsidies are more than 200 times as great as those given to oil and gas on the basis of per-unit-of-energy produced.

Perhaps it comes down to what Kevin Forbes, the director of the Center for the Study of Energy and Environmental Stewardship at Catholic University, told me: "Wind energy gives people a nice warm fuzzy feeling that we're taking action on climate change." Yet when it comes to CO2 emissions, "the reality is that it's not doing much of anything."

Mr. Bryce, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, recently published his fourth book, "Power Hungry: The Myths of 'Green' Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future"
The Wall Street Journal, 24 August 2010 Derek - I have changed this link, but it does cover the subject raised,
possibly better than the original link, I could not get to work..?

Way to go Australian climate sceptics,
"Australia" watches Bathurst, a good portion of the country all at once.
Hopefully more elsewhere will follow this example - it is encouraging and BRILLIANT.

American football, basketball, and soccer next maybe..
Although sponsoring a few science (actual) sceptics maybe a better idea really.

Bathurst car sponsorship from the climate sceptics
Saturday, 5 February, 2011 0:07
From:
"Climatesceptics@westnet.com.au"

Hi everyone,

Just informing you of our progress with the Bathurst car sponsorship -

Bathurst car sponsored by Climate sceptics getting some criticism
Paul Freestones Corvette Z06 is one of the favorites to win the C Class section of the Bathurst 12 hr.
The team of Paul Freestone, Hayden Pullen and David Sieders believe they could even finish in the first 10 cars which will be an excellent result if it happens.

We will even have a in car camera in our sponsored car with comments by one of the drivers on why he is a climate sceptic played in the Tv program of the race.
The TV program of the race which will be broadcast around the world at different times
I`ll let you know when it goes to air with several hrs of broadcast next week after the race this Sunday.

You can view the race live on this link
http://www.bathursttiming.com/

Video News of the sponsorship
http://wagga.iprime.com.au/index.php/new...acer-video

http://wagga.iprime.com.au/index.php/new...-row-video

Other articles about the sponsorship
http://paddocktalk.com/news/html/story-152465.html
http://www.ozracingwrap.com/general/2254...-help.html

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/grand-final-...1afiz.html

cheers
Leon Ashby
======================

My apologies if you already received this


Sat Feb 12th a Pre AGM meeting

On Sat Feb 12th a Pre AGM meeting is being organised to work towards bringing together two or more political parties at an AGM meeting in March

Current parties looking at this process - The Climate Sceptics and Sovereignty Party

The meeting will commence at 10.30 am at Sunshine RSL club 99 Dickson Street, Sunshine VIC 3020

Members of other like minded parties are welcome to attend the first part of the meeting and discuss Senate and Upper house voting options now we have a better grasp of the process. Getting 4% of the vote with a joint /coalition ticket being part of the target. Getting independent thinkers elected being the main goal.

A skype audio of the meeting will be attempted with listeners having the chance to ask the meeting questions via email. Details later.

A lunch is available at the RSL between 12 and 2 pm. For those who don`t know, RSL lunches are usually very good.

If anyone wants to fly to Melbourne for the meeting, I can pick you up at Tullamarine at 9.00 - 9.15 am - just email or phone me

The agenda will be to get as much decided as possible before an AGM / Amalgamation meeting (in March)

An introduction of the way upper house and senate tickets can work for smaller parties.
Where the Climate sceptics and Sovereignty party are up to.
Proposed constitution
Proposed Principles (two suggestions attached)
Proposed structure of the new party
Proposed statement of philosophy of the new party (all these are for better ideas to be put forward at this meeting or before the AGM)

Suggestions of people might stand for the new positions at the AGM
Decide when a new party name should be voted on by all members of the new entity ready to suggest at AGM.

When and where should the AGM be held.

Other issues needed to be sorted by the AGM.

Attached is two suggested list of principles and constitution for the new party.

Defined policies to be finalised after the AGM in accordance with the principles and membership involvement.