Category Archives: Climate Skeptics

Sunshine State Gored

A tribute to Al Gore’s Brisbane visit by Viv Forbes

The Priest of Global Warming

Flew in to earn big fees

He warned of heat waves forming

Unless we grew more trees

Alas for Big Al’s forecast

The weather did not warm

Antarctic winds began to blast

And snowy clouds were formed

So if you’re sick of sunshine

And bored with balmy heat

Just pay Big Al to wine and dine

You’ll soon have frost and sleet.

 

 

Climate change mafioso Al Gore interference in election

ABC should be defunded

by Viv Forbes, Executive Director, the Saltbush Club, Australia.  

The Saltbush Club today called for an enquiry into a last minute intervention by an American politician, Al Gore, into the Australian Election.

The Executive Director of the Saltbush Club, Viv Forbes, said that in such a tight election race, the intervention of someone with the international stature of Al Gore, assisted by the climate activist Australian Broadcasting Commission, could easily change the result of the election.

“The Gore intervention was not subtle – he labelled the LNP government climate policy as ‘not credible’ and taking the country ‘in the wrong direction’.

“Becoming even more partisan, Gore praised the opposition Labor plan ‘as an extremely significant act of leadership on the part of Australia.’

“This carefully timed intervention in a closely fought Australian election by a prominent foreign politician is a blatant attempt to promote a damaging climate agenda already rejected in the USA.

“This surely justifies an inquiry into foreign electoral interference and ABC complicity.”

https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/al-gore-weighs-in-on-australian-election-urges-australia-to-choose-the-right-path/news-story/c3c1e791154a695c74ced417a56ccd1e

Poland climatefest dumps several million tonnes of CO2 into atmosphere aiding plant growth

by Viv Forbes, science writer

$500M Climate Carnival Concludes.

COP 24 just concluded in Poland. Nearly 23,000 climate saviours attended this 24th annual climate carnival.

Every year, plane-loads of concerned busybodies fly to some interesting new location to spend tax dollars on a well-fed 12 day holiday. They concoct plans to ration and tax the energy used by real workers, farmers and families back home.

Few delegates arrived by bicycle or solar-powered plane – a fleet of at least 100 commercial, private and charter aircraft brought them at a cost estimated at US$57M. When the costs of hotels, ground transport, food, entertainment, air conditioning and office services are added, the bill is likely to top $500 M.

Australian taxpayers supported 46 junketeers. Now these Chicken Littles are back home spreading climate scare stories and lecturing locals to not overspend on Christmas presents.

There is a bright side – all that carbon dioxide emitted by planes, cars, buses, heaters, stoves, beer, champagne and Poland’s coal-fired power stations will help global plant growth.

Source of Estimates:
Cultural Communists Know How to Spend Your Money to Fight Climate Change.”

 

Australia in boots and all with climate racketeers at Poland conference

Liberal and Labor supported 46 emissaries now back home to spread climate scare stories while the absent US throws a party to celebrate fossil fuels

December 16, 2018

Negotiators from around the world struck an eleventh-hour deal Saturday, laying out rules to implement the Paris Agreement and keep the landmark 2015 climate accord intact.

But it wasn’t easy.

The two-week, drawn-out fight that included a rehashing of old battles and the introduction of new ones stretched late into the night here at the COP 24 UN climate conference in Katowice, Poland. The pitched battle hints at challenges to come in the global fight against climate change as the new world order continue to face a wave of political pressure that has put a strain on international cooperation.

15 December 2018, Poland, Katowice:  Australia sent 46 bureaucrats agreeing to shut down the remnants of domestic industry.  President Michal Kurtyka (M) of the UN Climate Change Conference COP24, and other participants of the climate summit are pleased about the decision of the compromise at the world climate summit. The aim of the agreement is to limit global warming to well below two degrees. Photo: Monika Skolimowska/dpa-Zentralbild/dpa (Photo by Monika Skolimowska/picture alliance via Getty Images)

“It has been a long road,” said Polish Energy State Secretary Michał Kurtyka, who served as President of the conference. “This deal hangs in fragile balance, we will all have to give in order to gain.

The issues on the table in Katowice were largely technical questions centering on accounting, finance and seemingly arcane word choices that signal how aggressively countries will cut their emissions. But geopolitics never lurked far from the surface, and the urgency of climate change never proved great enough to keep the politics from bubbling up and disrupting proceedings.

“People are pulling away at the edges of the multilateral system and you wonder whether or not it’s going to unravel further,” said Rachel Kyte, who headed the World Bank’s climate-change program and who now leads Sustainable Energy for All, before the final decision. “Is the beginning of something bigger? How do we cope with it?”

The potential for disruption was clear from the beginning. The U.S., the world’s biggest economy and second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, promised to exit the Paris Agreement last year under President Trump’s direction. This left a void in leadership even as the U.S. officially remains in the talks until it’s eligible to withdraw in 2020. That void opened the door for others to rebel, particularly in places where climate change does not jive with the priorities of populist or authoritarian governments.

In a highly-publicized affair, the U.S. held an event promoting fossil fuels, during which a White House official argued that the country was injecting a dose of “reality” in the face of “alarmism” around climate change. The event won the support of Australia, whose ambassador for the environment joined the panel. And a senior administration official said that other countries had conveyed that they appreciate the U.S. perspective even if they don’t feel comfortable stating so publicly. “They don’t talk about it as much,” said a senior administration official. But, “there’s an appreciation for the realism.”

 

In another conflict, Brazil faced off against the rest of the world when it threatened to reject any deal because of language that would fix an accounting loophole that gives the country double credit for preserving forests in the Amazon. The rest of world protested, but Brazil refused to budge and in the final hours negotiators decided to punt the issue to a future conference.

One of the biggest clamors of the conference came as four oil producing countries, including the U.S, Russia and Saudi Arabia, questioned the validity of climate science and refused to recognize the legitimacy of a report from the IPCC, the UN’s climate science body, showing the effects of climate change if temperatures rise more than 1.5°C.

Changing geopolitics even hit in places where governments care deeply about the threat of climate change. The wave of populism in the European Union fractured the block, weakening its negotiating position. Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists and a longtime climate negotiations expert, cited political change in Italy, the ongoing Brexit fiasco and the weak positions of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emanuel Macron as contributing to the E.U.’s struggle to wrangle other countries. “There’s always some of these clashes, but it’s more acute here,” he says.

And then there’s the U.S. relationship with China, which is in disarray over ongoing trade issues. The two countries, while often at odds in previous negotiations, often served as mediators between developing and developed countries and helped broker key deals. “There was a capacity to be a convener, each of us,” says Todd Stern, who served as the chief U.S. negotiator under Obama, of the U.S. and China. “That’s not available right now.”

All of these disruptions helped push the talks long into overtime, with a mix of yawns and applause when Kurtyka finally called the conference to an end more than a day later than originally scheduled. The deal that resulted came as a relief: the multilateral approach to fighting climate change will live to see another day.

At the same time, the new agreement left much to be desired from nearly all parties. “I trust that whenever you found dissatisfaction in one part of the text, it was balanced with satisfaction in another,” said Kurtyka.

Perhaps more importantly, all but the most out-of-touch acknowledged that the deal leaves much work to be done if the world actually hopes to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C, a level that the new IPCC report shows could wipe some countries off the map and cause widespread devastation across the planet.

“Carbon emissions keep rising and rising,” Mohamed Nasheed, former president of the Maldives, told reporters before the deal was finalized. “All we seem to be doing is talking and talking and talking.”

As countries continue to wind through the difficult international negotiation process, the obvious answer to make up for the gap caused by political disruption lies outside of the political system. Indeed, some local governments, businesses and apolitical multilateral organizations are already trying to take charge.

For most of the two decades that the U.N. has held these meetings, talk has focused on how to make action on climate change happen at a nebulous point in the future. Now, in large part thanks to the Paris Agreement, that action has already begun. And, while the international system is doomed to be defined by the least common denominator, many cities, states and businesses have stepped up to the challenge. In the months leading up to this conference, the World Bank committed $200 billion in climate investments, a slew of businesses lobbied for market solutions to climate change and alliances of sub-national governments in Japan, Argentina and Mexico joined the U.S. in making commitments to fill the gap in their national governments’ efforts.

“To combat climate change we need much much more than government,” says Laurence Tubiana, CEO of the European Climate Foundation and a central framer of the Paris Agreement. “It’s not for state only. It’s for society.”

The only issue is that none of this is moving fast enough. The IPCC report shows that temperatures have already risen 1°C as a result of human activity and that figure will surpass 1.5°C as early as 2030 without a dramatic shift in direction. A lot of work is necessary to facilitate such a shift. And that’s going to be a huge challenge so long as political tensions persist.

Write to Justin Worland at justin.worland@time.com.

 

Read the rest of this entry

Saltbush Club warns Morrison Poland climatefest is a ‘war on west’

Australia should COP-OUT of COP-24.


by Viv Forbes,  science writer

Secretary of the Saltbush Club

The growing Saltbush Climate Lobby has called on PM Morrison to make no new commitments at the COP24 climate-fest to be held in Poland in a few days.

 Australians no longer trust what politicians and officials are doing behind closed doors far from home.

Nothing of benefit to Australian consumers, tax payers or business will come out of COP24. It will just extend the UN’s war on our cheap, reliable hydro-carbon fuels and the backbone industries that rely on them – primary industries, transport, processing and manufacturing.

It is effectively a ‘War on the West’.

Australia is particularly vulnerable with no nuclear power, no geothermal power and limited hydropower. This war on reliable hydro-carbon fuels and the promotion of unreliable wind and solar power will increasingly deny our industries and consumers cheap reliable power.

There is no justification for the War on carbon dioxide – there is no proof that CO2 drives global temperature and Earth’s climate cannot be tweaked by erecting windmills or putting taxes on carbon dioxide.

COP24 will descend into a grab for cash, and Australia is one of those pullets they plan to pluck.
“Believing carbon dioxide is the planet’s climate control knob is pretty close to believing in magic.”
– Dr. Richard Lindzen

Viv Forbes

forbes@saltbushclub.com

www.saltbushclub.com

Washpool   Qld Australia

 Developing countries are gearing up for the big pay day, and china still defines itself as a developing country:

http://sdg.iisd.org/news/basic-ministers-call-for-just-transition-new-finance-goal-ahead-of-katowice-climate-change-conference/

Scientist slams CSIRO for fraudulently receiving research funds over CO2

Submission to the Independent Commission Against Corruption  by Douglas Cotton, B.Sc., B.A., Dip. Bus. Admin over Greenhouse (greenhoax) events

From 2011 until the present I have spent thousands of hours in study and communication with other scientists in regard to atmospheric and sub-terrestrial physics, in particular as to how it relates to the issue regarding the alleged warming of Earth (and Venus) by carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. I have written three papers, the first (“Radiated Energy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics”) having been peer-reviewed in 2012 when it appeared on several websites. This paper and two others are now appearing at https://ssrn.com/author=2627605. From my research and application of the laws of physics I can say with certainty that the so-called “greenhouse gases” (which are mostly water vapour and carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere) can do nothing but cool the surface of Earth, not warm it as is alleged by the CSIRO. By being a part of a world-wide movement promulgating the false claims about carbon dioxide supposedly causing warming, the CSIRO is fraudulently receiving funds for useless research which does little more than make the obvious conclusion that more carbon dioxide leads to more radiation from such.

 With several Freedom of Information questions directed to the CSIRO I have come to the conclusion that they have failed to pay due diligence in checking what is false physics supposedly supporting “science” claiming this warming.  If that science were correct then rainforests (with about 4% water vapour above them) should be about 50 to 80 degrees hotter than dry regions like deserts which may have around 1% or less of the greenhouse gas water vapour above them.  The correct physics has been known by some physicists since the brilliant physicist Josef Loschmidt explained in 1876 how it is gravity acting on air molecules which makes the base of the atmosphere warmer than the top of the troposphere, not radiation from cold greenhouse gases supposedly causing heat transfer into the already-warmer surface.

 I have pointed out to the CSIRO in notes attached to my FOI requests and reference to the above three papers that their “science” is obviously false. There are others like myself with qualifications in physics who also know it is false. In fact there are hundreds of published papers saying similar. Yet the CSIRO refuses to look into such papers and arrogantly claims their “scientists” are correct. Such people appear to be those from the relatively young science of climatology rather than their physicists who ought to understand the physics of heat transfer processes and maximum entropy production as happens in accord with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The correct physics is in my 2013 paper “Planetary Core and Surface Temperatures.”  

 The CSIRO has been asked in FOI requests to produce their physics and also evidence of warming by water vapour and carbon dioxide.  They have produced no such physics and no papers containing empirical evidence of actual surface warming by these gases. Their cited papers merely assume that more carbon dioxide causes more warming. Their science claims that water vapour does most of “33 degrees” of warming of the global mean surface temperature, whereas in fact my study of data clearly indicates it cools the surface because it reduces the magnitude of the gravitationally-induced tropospheric temperature gradient.

 Despite all this evidence and correct physics that I have sent them, and the explanations they have been provided with as to why their science is false, they persist in deliberately failing to look into this, and so I can only conclude that they realise that to tell the world the science is wrong would lead to many of their staff losing research jobs that are funded by the government based on their false science. I can only conclude that this amounts to corruption.

 

JCU Professor sacked for blowing the whistle on corrupted climate data

Sacked James Cook University Professor Peter Ridd who blew the whistle on fictitious ‘climate change’ research continues to fight the institution over disciplinary action and now termination of employment.

He has received the same scurrilous treatment as his colleague, the late Professor Bob Carter who also made public the incredibly erroneous and false science behind global warming and its alleged deleterious effect on the Great Barrier Reef.

James Cook Uni Cairns campus gives outspoken climate change sceptic Professor Peter Ridd the heave ho for jeopardising research funds

Both academics questioned the veracity of research and the alleged reef destruction claimed by the leftist academic junta at the Cairns and Townsville campuses.

Both were ostracised and censured for attacking the ‘dodgy’ science which the university academia continuously bleats with the aid of the ABC in order to keep the state and federal grants lining the coffers..

The nitwit PM Turnbull pledged $500 million in the budget to appease the green Mafioso in the hope of sidelining some Green votes and in an effort to keep local federal Liberal member Warren Entsch in the seat of Leichardt.

Both academics for some years have stated almost categorically, ‘there is nothing wrong with the reef’ and ‘climate change’…… is bloody nonsense.

The late and esteemed Professor Bob Carter many years ago disproved the global warming and climate change hoax but was ostracised by his socialist peers and disowned by JCU Townsville.

A crowdfunding page has been re-opened for Professor Ridd’s mounting legal costs. His comments appear below:

Just an update of my battle

On 2 May, 2018, I received a letter from James Cook University (JCU) terminating my employment. JCU have sacked me because I dared to fight the university and speak the truth about science and the Great Barrier Reef.

Shortly after I went public with the GoFundMe campaign to which you donated in February the university presented me with a further set of misconduct allegations, which alleged that I acted inappropriately by talking about the case and have now ended my employment.

I will be fighting their employment termination, alongside the original 25 charges behind JCU’s ‘final censure’ last year.

As a consequence of the sacking, and the new misconduct allegations, my legal costs have substantially increased. JCU appears to be willing to spend their near unlimited legal resources fighting me. In the name of honesty and truth in science, we must fight back. We have an excellent legal team and are confident that we can win the legal case.

I feel extremely indebted to all those who have given so generously. I was blown away by the number of people who supported me, and I had hoped that more funding would not be necessary. Sadly, however circumstances have changed.

I have contributed another $15000 of my own money, in addition to the $24000k I have already spent. However, based on the growing complexity of the case, we will need to raise an additional $159000. It is a bit frightening, but we have reopened the GoFundMe site to receive more donations.

You have already contributed generously so all I ask of you is to help spread the word to expand the number of people who are helping.

I know there were many who were unable to donate the first time – including my own Mum – due to the speed we reached the original target of $95K.

For additional background on all the new allegations from JCU, I have uploaded all the documentation so that you can judge JCU’s allegations for yourself if you wish. https://wordpress.com/page/platogbr.wordpress.com/223

In summary, JCU (1) objects to my criticism of the earlier allegations; (2) criticised my involvement with the Institute of Public Affairs; and (3) objects to me not remaining silent. The facts of the matter are simple: (1) the earlier allegations were an unreasonable infringement on my academic freedom, I was well within my rights to criticise JCU; (2) I have never been paid by the IPA, other than some initial support for my legal case and reimbursement for flights and hotels related to speaking arrangements which is normal academic practice; and (3) I am well within my rights, as stated by my employment agreement, to speak publicly about disciplinary proceedings.

 

Thank you,

Peter Ridd

JCU censures its own Professor for telling the truth “… there is nothing wrong with the Barrier Reef…”

The Australian Institute of Marine Studies has been caught out telling porkies….

by Don Aitkin

Well, the pressure to conform is happening again, and at Professor Bob Carter’s old university, James Cook University in Townsville. The late Bob Carter was censured by JCU some years ago for ridiculing the Global Warming  theory.     This time the proposed villain is JCU professor of physics, Peter Ridd, whose interests include coastal oceanography, the effects of sediments upon coral reefs, past and future climates and atmospheric modelling. I have met Peter Ridd, and I know something about his work. He has been head of the Department of Physics for ten years. His intellectual reach is wider than my short summary here, but I have put in what gives him some status in the world of global warming.

Professor Ridd’s comments on Sky news, to the effect that “We can no longer trust the scientific organisations like the Australian Institute of marine Science, even things like the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies… The science is coming out not properly checked, tested or replicated, and this is a great shame.”

JCU Professor Peter Ridd said that a paper by JCU scientists foretelling the end of the reef was simply ‘laughable’. Bleaching is a natural event, and occurred long before there was human activity anywhere near the reef. What is more, reefs recover, sometimes quite quickly. The University is competing for research funds thus it has to create a doomsday scenario.

He has been in the news before, drawing attention to the need to change the peer review system, and to what he sees as exaggerated claims about the dangers that threaten the Great Barrier Reef, alleging that scientists or spokesmen for scientific organisations like the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) and government organisations like the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) were not behaving in a scientifically scrupulous way in announcing new claims and about danger. He was not alone in saying these things. The chairman of GBRMPA himself protested that headlines saying that ’93 per cent of the reef is ‘critically dead’ or that 35 per cent or even 50 per cent of the entire reef is now gone’ were rubbish. A former chairman said that ‘environmentalist were ‘exaggerating the impact of coral bleaching for political and financial gain’. Ridd said that a paper by JCU scientists foretelling the end of the reef was simply ‘laughable’. Bleaching is a natural event, and occurred long before there was human activity anywhere near the reef. What is more, reefs recover, sometimes quite quickly.

Nonetheless, the university told him he was ‘not displaying responsibility in respecting the reputations of other colleagues’. Do it again, he was told, and we’ll try you for ‘serious misconduct’. I’ve written about this before, and indeed the above is an introduction to the news that JCU indeed decided to discipline Professor Ridd, and started the process in late August last year. What for? The University’s statement is that it was disturbed by Professor Ridd’s comments on Sky news, to the effect that ‘We can no longer trust the scientific organisations like the Australian Institute of marine Science, even things like the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies… The science is coming out not properly checked, tested or replicated, and this is a great shame.’ Such statements, said the University, were ‘not in the collegial and academic spirit of the search for knowledge, understanding and truth’. Further, his comments had denigrated AIMS and were ‘not respectful and courteous’. In a letter tabled with the court, the University said that his comments could damage the reputation of AIMS and the University’s relationships with it.

On this occasion, Professor Ridd decided he had had enough, and launched his own court case against the CEO, claiming conflict of interest, apprehended bias and actual bias. It happens that the University’s Vice-Chancellor is a director of AIMS, which produces an obvious conflict of interest. The University then told Ridd he was not to ‘disclose or discuss these matters with media or in any other public forum’. His lawyers pointed out that either the University was incompetent or it was guided by bias, which the University’s lawyers denied.

Peter Ridd was kind enough to write to me  about the alleged misconduct involved in talking to the media about the misconduct allegation, and later alerted me to the fact that there was deemed to be further misconduct  involved in writing to me! I wish him well in all of this, which is so unnecessary, and so inimical to the cause of scholarship, argument and the advancement of knowledge.

I can appreciate the dilemma facing the Vice-Chancellor of James Cook University, for there is no doubt that research grant money is really important. I have to say that I did not have a comparable problem in my eleven years in the role, despite the pressure on everyone to get grant money if they could. Nonetheless, there is no doubt where I think the right is. A scientist who says that other people’s work is flawed has to show cause. In the case of the Great Barrier Reef that is not hard to do. There has been a lot of loud noise based on small pieces of work. It is not widely understood that the Reef is a vast system, and that it is not closely monitored. You would need hundreds, thousands, of researchers and assistants to do that. And there are lots of natural and cyclic causes for changes to the Reef’s coral. These events have happened before, and they will happen again. The correct response from those he has criticised is to respond in the proper way, show that Ridd is wrong, and that their work can withstand his criticism.

To the best of my knowledge that has not happened. Instead, Professor Ridd has been attacked in an ad hominem way. It seems to me utterly wrong for his own University to try to ‘discipline’ him so that he does not criticise others. That is not what science is about. It doesn’t matter what relationships JCU has with AIMS. If the AIMS work is poor, or inflated claims have been made about the importance of its research, the University ought to be able to point that out, and suggest that better work ought to be done, or that claims should be more subdued.

Ah, but this is the Reef, an icon of the environmental movement. And there is a lot of money about for ‘research’ that is ‘consistent’ with the notion that doom is at hand. Like Professor Ridd, I think that the University has gone down utterly the wrong track, and the sooner it departs from it the better. As it happens, the book I referred to at the beginning of this essay, No End of a Lesson, gives instances of other high-handed behaviour from Vice-Chancellors. They are not emperors, and should never give the impression that they think they are.

Had enough of climate change yet?

Be Careful What you Wish For

In today’s crazy world, western politicians are wasting billions of tax-payer dollars force-feeding costly unreliable green energy in the bizarre belief that this will somehow change Earth’s climate.

Even more incredible, they fear global warmth and seem hell-bent on creating global cooling. They should study climate history. It is snow and ice, cold dry air and carbon dioxide starvation we need to fear, not a warm, moist, fertile, bountiful atmosphere.

Climate change is natural and unstoppable.

Just 20,000 years ago, Earth was in one of its recurring glacial phases. A thick massive ice sheet smothered Canada, Alaska, Iceland, GrRadical Greens exposedeenland, North Asia and Europe as far south as London. Much of the animal and plant life of the previous warm era was extinguished. Even in warmer lands not covered by the ice sheet, plants suffered as the cold oceans removed moisture and carbon dioxide plant food from the atmosphere.

Then, because of changing cycles in Earth’s orbit and tilt, reinforced by changing solar cycles, the sun warmed the frozen lands. The great ice sheets melted, sea levels rose and the warming oceans expelled moisture and CO2 plant food into the atmosphere. Plant life recovered. Tundra, forests, grasslands and herbivores advanced towards the pole and fish became abundant in the shallow seas that flooded coastal plains. Hunters, herders, farmers and fishermen followed the food.

Human population increased greatly. They gave thanks for the warmth, and worshipped the sun.

But the peak of the modern warm era is past, and the natural cycles controlling global temperatures are pointing downwards.

Only an idiot with a death wish for life on Earth would attempt to accelerate our inevitable descent into the next ice age.

Luckily, their costly war on warmth is totally futile, but their war on carbon energy will prove tragically misguided in the cold times ahead.

Viv Forbes
vforbes@bigpond.com
Washpool Qld Australia

Further Reading for those with open Minds:

Record cold but alarmists still trumpet “Global Warming”:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/02/alarmists-trumpet-global-warming-record-cold-temperatures/


Niagara Falls freeze; sharks freeze:
http://metro.co.uk/2017/12/30/niagara-falls-freezes-sharks-freezing-death-atlantic-7192401/?ito=cbshare


Han River freezes earliest in 71 years:
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2017/12/113_240982.html


Russia building nuclear powered ice-breakers:
https://principia-scientific.org/northern-sea-route-blocked-with-thick-ice/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+psintl+%28Principia+Scientific+Intl+-+Latest+News%29


Much of USA covered in snow:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/01/01/almost-half-of-the-contiguous-usa-still-covered-in-snow/


Extreme cold sets records as Canadian natural gas usage soars:
https://globalnews.ca/news/3939464/extreme-cold-sets-records-as-saskenergy-usage-soars/\


But just when you need it, green energy fails:
https://realclimatescience.com/2017/12/ontario-in-deep-freeze-wind-and-solar-generating-less-than-10-of-their-power/


But King Coal comes to the rescue:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/coal-to-the-rescue-as-record-cold-grips-the-east/article/2644591


And Global Warming Movies flop:
http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/12/31/hollywood-pushes-global-warming-films-movies-flop/


Chinese children get frost-bite when coal is banned:
http://joannenova.com.au/2017/12/all-it-takes-is-a-few-kids-with-frostbite-to-foil-a-great-government-plan-and-coal-saves-the-day/


And in UK wind farms supply just 2% of power:
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2017/12/28/wind-farms-in-england-only-supply-2-of-power/


In warm eras, increased CO2 boosts plant growth:
http://www.co2science.org/articles/V20/nov/a12.php
http://www.co2science.org/articles/V21/jan/a1.php


But there has been no CO2 Warming for the last 40 years:
http://www.cfact.org/2018/01/02/no-co2-warming-for-the-last-40-years/


Plants suffers as Carbon Dioxide levels fall during Ice Ages:
http://www.pnas.org/content/102/3/690.full?sid=5e3bdf35-c2a6-4fe7-b336-eea3917571f2


The Ice may arrive quickly:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1227990/Ice-Age-took-just-SIX-months-arrive–10-years.html#ixzz3U4Mz3fs9


While Warmists Watch Wrong Weather Warnings:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/13/letter-warmists-watch-wrong-weather-warnings/

A healthy Great Barrier Reef spawns fictitious, costly scare campaigns

The never-ending battles of the Coral Sea

by Viv Forbes, science writer

For at least 50 years Australian taxpayers and other innocents have supported a parasitic industry in academia, bureaucracy, law, media and the tax-exempt Green Alarm “Charities”, all studying, regulating, inspecting and writing about yet another “imminent threat to Queensland’s Great Barrier Reef.”

The Queensland Labor Party Government is about to embark on another reef-runoff onslaught against coastal farmers that is intended to close down farming along the entire coastline, from Cooktown to Brisbane.

It has become the never-ending battle of the Coral Sea.

The threats change, but there is always a doomsday forecast – Crown-of-Thorns, oil drilling, fishing, cane farming, coastal shipping, global warming, ocean acidity, coral bleaching, port dredging, chemical and fertiliser runoff, coal transport, river sediments, loss of world heritage status etc. Every recycled scare, magnified by the media and parroted by politicians, generates more income for the alarm industry, usually at the expense of taxpayers, consumers or local industries.

The reality is that sea creatures would starve in pure water – all marine life needs nutrients, salts and minerals. These come from other life forms, from decomposing rocks and organic matter carried to the sea by rivers, from dissolving atmospheric gases, or from delta and shelf sediments stirred up by floods, cyclones, dredging or coastal shipping. No one supports over-use of toxic man-made chemicals, but well-run cane, cattle and coal companies can co-exist with corals.

Conservation bodies and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority conjure up doomsday scare campaigns for a healthy Barrier Reef to attract more funding from inept government

Corals first appeared 500 million years ago and have proven to be one of Earth’s great survivors. They outlasted the Carboniferous Forests, the Permian and Cretaceous extinctions, the dinosaurs, the mammoths, the Neanderthals and the Pleistocene cycles of ice age and warming. They thrive in warm tropical water, cluster around hot volcanic fumaroles and survive massive petroleum spills, natural oil seeps, tidal waves and volcanic dust. They have even recolonised the Montebello Island waters devastated by atomic bomb testing in the 1950’s.

The ENSO oscillation of blobs of warm Pacific water which caused recent coral bleaching can be identified in historical records for at least 400 years. Corals have survived El Nino warmings for thousands of years and they will probably outlast Homo Alarmism as Earth proceeds into the next glacial epoch.

See the Supercorals:
https://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/supercoral.png

Corals do not rely on computer models of global temperature to advise them – they read the sea level thermometer which falls and rises as the great ice sheets come and go.

In the warming phase like the one just ending, ice melts, sea levels rise and the reef that houses the corals may get drowned. Corals have two choices – build their reef higher or just float south/inshore and build a new reef (like the Great Barrier Reef) in shallower, cooler water. When islands sink beneath rising oceans, corals may build their own coral atolls as fast as the water rises.

Then when the cold era returns, ice sheets grow, sea levels fall, and the warm era coral reefs get stranded on the new beaches and coastal plains. Usually the process is slow enough to allow the coral polyps to float into deeper warmer water closer to the equator and build another reef.

This eminently sensible policy of “move when you have to” has proved a successful survival policy for the corals for 500 million years.

Humans should copy the corals – “forget the computer climate models but watch real data like actual sea levels and . . . move when you have to.

Paris Accord tripling electricity prices with worse to come

Abbott was deposed because he would not sign the Paris  Climate Accord. Turnbull did as the financial oligarchy instructed.

Daring to Doubt”

by Tony Abbott:

“Climate change is by no means the sole or even the most significant

symptom of the changing interests and values of the West. Still, only

societies with high levels of cultural amnesia could have made such a religion

out of it. Beware the pronouncement, “the science is settled”. It’s the spirit of

the Inquisition, the thought-police down the ages. Almost as bad is the claim

that “99 per cent of scientists believe” as if scientific truth is determined by

votes rather than facts.”

–Tony Abbott, 2017 Annual GWPF Lecture, London 9 October 2017

“The Paris Agreement”

by President Donald Trump

What he really said.

https://www.thegwpf.com/reminder-what-president-trump-really-said-about-the-paris-agreem

Serious Defects in Australia’s Energy Policies

A group of retired senior engineers challenge Australia’s bi-partisan energy

foolishness. See:

https://carbon-sense.com/2017/10/13/open-letter-to-the-prime-minister-of-australia/

“Escaping the Renewable Energy Trap”

by Alan Moran:

https://www.spectator.com.au/2017/09/escaping-the-renewable-energy-subsidy-trap/

http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/lights-out.pdf

-from Viv Forbes

Greens determined to have us riding pushbikes and using paraffin lamps

Back to Bolted-Down Industries

by Viv Forbes, Science Writer

Once upon a time Australia was attractive to processing, refining and manufacturing industries using our abundant mineral and food resources, our reliable low-cost coal-fired electricity and a workforce trained in technical skills.

No longer.

Our last oil refinery has closed, leaving just 3 weeks supply of refined motor fuel in the country and for the first time in at least 60 years Australia no longer produces motor vehicles. China and India have about 430 coal power plants under construction but Australia has not built a single coal-fired power station for seven years – some politicians even rejoice when they manage to close and demolish one. Brisbane’s new trains are being made in India, Victa mowers are made in China and most coastal shipping died decades ago. Steel works and refineries producing aluminium, copper and zinc are under stress. All these industries are being pushed overseas by costly unreliable electricity and other government barriers and burdens.

Australia has only three weeks supply of refined fuel available at any time. The ALP, Greens and Liberals have supported closing down of our onshore refineries preferring to import fuel. Australia runs on diesel. The stupid Greens will continue to enforce the collapse of the fossil fuel industry until every citizen is riding a push bike.

 

Red-green policies being pushed by all major parties are making Australia more dependent on bolted-down industries such as mining and farming that can’t be sent overseas because their basic resources are here. And green opposition to nuclear power increases Aussie reliance on coal.

A century ago Australians relied on wool, wheat, gold, silver, copper, lead-zinc, butter, beef and timber – all products of bolted-down industries.

Red-green policies are pushing us back to those days. Politicians need to remember Newton’s Law of Bureaucracy – whenever the government tries to use the force of law to achieve economic goals the long term results will be equal and opposite to those intended.

So in the long run, red-green energy and environmental policies will make us more dependent on the industries they now attack – mining, farming, forestry and fishing.

Further Reading:

Construction of new coal-fired power plants is increasing in at least 35 countries:
https://climatism.wordpress.com/2017/09/13/world-building-new-coal-plants-faster-than-it-shuts-them/

Asia is returning to Coal:
https://thediplomat.com/2017/02/why-is-asia-returning-to-coal/

Greens Disappointed by Economic Growth:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/11/14/co2-emissions-surge-greens-disappointed-by-economic-growth/