Category Archives: Climate Skeptics
One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts says today’s weather patterns have occurred in the past.
by Lindsey Symonds
And here in Briz – at the juicy end of the Big Pineapple we have had our first climate lockdown – school’s out last week when a few clouds appear in the sky. This is the new forecast: cloudy with a chance of climate change and lockdown. I can hear the weather widget now.
They have to have a state of emergency now that the Whole Schlomo of the CoVID narrative has tanked. They have to keep their operation on life support. All the triple vaxxed liberals and cultural Marxists are back into the bistros with no mask sipping their soy lattes. So now it is time to get the sheeple terrified of climate change. Pathetic Polar bears floating on icebergs isn’t going to cut it. Now they have to get out the flood machine and flood em out. Looks like poor old Northern Rivers NSW got the worst of it. My tradies working up here on Tuesday told me the news from their surf club Coolie – a live cow came ashore at D Bar. Can you imagine. The Tweed with all the dead livestock floating down and the bull sharks swarming the carcasses. This cow just swims the flood and makes it to the surf.
Fellow Australians. Never to doubt it – we can flip our politutes, stand down these corporate agents of the UN and the High Cabal, reclaim our nation and set the good ship Australia on its foundations in law and government. It can be done.
The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Great Reset has been sold to the public as an opportunity to build a sustainable, carbon-neutral future. The ubiquitous sound bite of build back better, or “build back greener”, as UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson recently rephrased it, suggests that recovery from the economic devastation, following the alleged pandemic, is a chance for the world to “reset”.
Sustainable Development Goal 11 (b) of UN Agenda 2030 states:
By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards … adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and implement, in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, holistic disaster risk management at all levels.
The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, written in 2015, states:
The recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction phase, which needs to be prepared ahead of a disaster, is a critical opportunity to Build Back Better.
With the 2020 emergence of the alleged global pandemic, human settlements have certainly been implementing plans. Fitting in perfectly with Agenda 2030, our leaders efforts to build back better are focused upon a recovery which appears to have been planned long before anyone had even heard of SARS-CoV-2.
A Vision for the Future
The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) published their Vision 2050 document in 2010. Aiming to transform the global economy to meet Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), they said that a pathway would be needed. It would “require fundamental changes in governance structures, economic frameworks, business and human behaviour”. They envisaged two distinct periods of transformation.
The WBCSD is an organisation of 200 CEOs from some of the world’s largest global corporations. It is the hub for more than 60 national and regional business councils and partner organisations, including the United Nations, the EU Commission, the World Economic Forum (WEF), the World Bank, the World Health Organisation, the World Wildlife Fund, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford Foundation and BlackRock.
They called the decade between 2010 to 2020 the Turbulent Teens. This would be the time to construct the mechanisms that would enable the fundamental changes to be established. Transformation Time would start in 2020, once the fundamental changes had been able to “mature into more consistent knowledge, behaviour and solutions”.
In their conclusion, the WBCSD suggested how the process of moving from the Turbulent Teens into the Transformation Time could occur:
Crisis. Opportunity. It is a business cliché, but there is truth in it.
While for many of us 2020 was a disaster, the WBCSD were among the central planners of the new normal global economy for whom the global pandemic could not have arrived at a more opportune moment. It was a remarkable coincidence that the right crisis opportunity arrived precisely on schedule. In 2020, they updated their Vision 2050. Recognising that the time to transform had arrived, they said:
Despite its enormous human and financial cost, the COVID-19 pandemic has created an opportunity to drive and accelerate change at a completely different pace than we may have previously imagined to be possible.
Yet they did imagine exactly this possibility. One WBSCD partner, the WEF, have also been counting their lucky stars. The Covid-19 alleged global pandemic was an opportunity to make the significant social, economic and political changes they had long been hoping for:
The Covid-19 crisis, and the political, economic and social disruptions it has caused, is fundamentally changing the traditional context for decision-making … As we enter a unique window of opportunity to shape the recovery, this initiative will … inform all those determining the future state of global relations, the direction of national economies, the priorities of societies, the nature of business models and the management of a global commons.
The pandemic has presented such an existential crisis … that it has driven us to confront the global threat of climate change more forcefully.. Markets started to price climate risk into the value of securities … then the pandemic took hold.. and the reallocation of capital accelerated even faster.
I believe that this is the beginning of a long but rapidly accelerating transition — one that will unfold over many years and reshape asset prices of every type … the climate transition presents a historic investment opportunity.
Fink’s comments outline how the Build Back Better Great Reset is intended to work. Some people seem to think that sustainable development has got something to do with environmentalism, saving the planet or some other vague “green agenda”. Unfortunately, they are way off the mark.
Sustainable development means stakeholder capitalism as the corporate glue holding together a global network of public-private partnerships that are collectively assuming the mantle of global governors. Under their stewardship, the international monetary and financial system (IMFS) is being transformed. The stakeholder partner network is busy capitalising a $120 trillion Carbon Bond market as the foundation of the new IMFS.
Environmentalist campaigners like Greta Thunberg and Extinction Rebellion perhaps imagine they are in the vanguard of a global environmentalist battle against climate change and the big polluters who are guilty of causing it. In reality, unwittingly or not, they are image leaders for the big polluters’ public relations department.
The same despised global corporations are key members of a global public-private partnership which is using the ruse of climate change to establish the new IMFS: one that will consolidate their global economic power and thus their worldwide authority.
Not only did the claimed global pandemic deliver the right crisis at precisely the right time, in another truly remarkable coincidence, it accustomed us to the behavioural changes required to live in our new, sustainable IMFS. Reduced travel, limited access to resources, low employment, austerity, reliance upon state financial support and new forms of currency based upon sustainable, stakeholder metrics are all part of our planned net zero future.
WEF partners Deutsche Bank are certainly among the global corporations who are aware of this. They published an article in November 2020 in which their senior analyst Eric Heymann outlined what a carbon neutral economy portends:
The impact of the current climate policy on people’s everyday lives is still quite abstract. Climate policy comes in the form of higher taxes and fees on energy. If we really want to achieve climate neutrality, we need to change our behaviour in all these areas of life. A major turnaround in climate policy will certainly produce losers among both households and corporates.
In addition, prosperity and employment are likely to suffer considerably. There are no adequate cost-effective technologies yet to allow us to maintain our living standards in a carbon-neutral way. That means that carbon prices will have to rise considerably in order to nudge people to change their behaviour. Another (or perhaps supplementary) option is to tighten regulatory law considerably.
To what extent may we be willing to accept some kind of eco-dictatorship (in the form of regulatory law) in order to move towards climate neutrality?
This is congruent with the observations of both the former and current Bank of England Governors. Prior to his departure as governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney warned that companies unable to meet the SDG regulatory standards “will go bankrupt, without question”, In other words, lines of credit, without which even multinational corporations cannot hope to function, will be limited only to those who can afford to implement the required changes.
More recently — now as the UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance, the UK Government’s Special Advisor to the COP26 conference and a Board Trustee of the WEF — Carney reinforced his message and signalled to his stakeholder partners how the new IMFS would select the corporate winners and losers.
There will be industries, sectors and firms that do very well during this process because they will be part of the solution. But there will also be ones that lag behind and they will be punished.
The winners and losers dichotomy won’t just apply to corporations. The new stakeholder IMFS does not appear to be based upon mass employment, either. Recently, the UK Government released their Green Jobs Taskforce Report. Promising a glittering future of employment opportunities, they cite the International Energy Agency (IEA) report Net Zero by 2050: A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector. The IEA, in turn, had stated:
The transition to net zero brings substantial new opportunities for employment, with 14 million jobs created by 2030 … In our pathway, around 5 million jobs are lost … meaning structural changes can cause shocks for communities with impacts that persist over time.
This requires careful policy attention to address the employment losses. It will be vital to minimise hardships associated with these disruptions … locating new clean energy facilities in heavily affected areas wherever possible, and providing regional aid.
Pivotal Jobs Page 2
Consider this admission on 12 May 2012 by the prominent German meteorologist Klaus Eckart Puls in an interview by Bettina Hahne-Waldscheck of the Swiss magazine “Factum”, translated, summarized and paraphrased for brevity by P. Gosselin in a journal article titled “The Belief That CO2 Can Regulate Climate Is Sheer Absurdity”:
Bettina: You’ve been criticizing the theory of man-made global warming for years. How did you become skeptical?
Puls: Ten years ago I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data — first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day I feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it . . . Scientifically it is sheer absurdity to think we can get a nice climate by turning a CO2 adjustment knob.
Bettina: Is there really climate change?
Puls: Climate change is normal. There have always been phases of global warming, many that far exceeded the extent we see today. But there hasn’t been any warming since 1998. In fact the IPCC suppliers of data even show a slight cooling.
Bettina: The IPCC is projecting 0.2 degrees Celsius warming per decade, i.e., 2 to 4 degrees Celsius by the year 2100. What’s your view?
Puls: These are speculative model projections, so-called scenarios — and no
prognoses. Because of climate’s high complexity, reliable prognoses just aren’t possible. Nature does what it wants, and not what the models present as prophecy.
The entire CO2 debate is nonsense. Even if CO2 were doubled, the temperature would rise only 1 degree Celsius. The remainder of the IPCC’s assumed warming is based purely on speculative amplification mechanisms. Even though CO2 has risen, there has been no warming in 13 years.
Bettina: How does sea level look?
Puls: Sea level rise has slowed down. Moreover, it has dropped a half centimeter over the last 2 years. It’s important to remember that mean sea level is a calculated magnitude, and not a measured one. There are a great number of factors that influence sea level, e.g., tectonic processes, continental shifting, wind currents, passats, volcanoes. Climate change is only one of ten factors.
Bettina: What Have we measured at the North Sea?
Puls: In the last 400 years, sea level at the North Sea coast has risen about 1.40 meters. That’s about 35 centimeters per century. In the last 100 years, the North Sea has risen only 25 centimeters.
Bettina: Does the sea level rise have anything to do with the melting North Pole?
Puls: That’s a misleading conclusion. Even if the entire North Pole melted, there would be no sea level rise because of the principles of buoyancy.
Bettina: Is the melting of the glaciers in the Alps caused by global warming?
Puls: There are many factors at play. As one climbs a mountain, the temperature drops about 0.65 degrees Celsius per 100 meters. Over the last 100 years it has gotten about 0.75 degrees Celsius warmer and so the temperature boundary has shifted up about 100 meters. But observations tell us that ice also 1,000 meters up and higher has melted. Clearly there are other reasons for this, namely soot and dust. But soot and dust do not have only anthropogenic origins; they are also caused by nature via volcanoes, dust storms, and wildfires. Advances and retreats of glaciers have always taken place throughout the Earth’s history. Glaciology studies clearly show that glaciers over the last 10,000 years were smaller on average than today.
Bettina: In your view, melting Antarctic sea ice and the fracture of a huge iceberg 3 years ago are nothing to worry about?
Puls: To the contrary, the Antarctic ice cap has grown both in area and volume over the last 30 years, and temperature has declined. This 30-year trend is clear to see. The Amundsen Scott Station of the USA shows that temperature has been declining there since 1957. 90 percent of the Earth’s ice is stored in Antarctica, which is one and a half times larger than Europe.
Bettina: Then why do we always read it is getting warmer down there?
Puls: Here they are only talking about the West Antarctic peninsula, which is where the big chunk of ice broke off in 2008 — from the Wilkins-Shelf. This area is hardly 1 percent of the entire area of Antarctica, but it is exposed to Southern Hemisphere west wind drift and some of the strongest storms of the planet.
Bettina: What causes such massive chunks of ice to break off?
Puls: There are lots of factors, among them the intensity of the west wind fluctuations. These west winds have intensified over the last 20 years as part of natural ocean and atmospheric cycles, and so it has gotten warmer on the west coast of the Antarctic peninsula. A second factor is the larger waves associated with the stronger storms. The waves are more powerful and so they break off more ice. All these causes are meteorological and physical, and have nothing to do with a climate catastrophe.
Bettina: Then such ice breaks had to have occurred in the past too?
Puls: This has been going on for thousands of years, also in the 1970’s back when all the talk was about “global cooling”. Back then there were breaks with ice chunks hundreds of square kilometers in area. People were even discussing the possibilities of towing these huge ice chunks to dry countries like South Africa or Namibia in order to use them as a drinking water supply.
Bettina: What about all the media photos of polar bears losing their ice?
Puls: That is one of the worst myths used for generating climate hysteria. Polar bears don’t eat ice, they eat seals. Polar bears go hungry if we shoot their food supply of seals. The polar bear population has increased with moderately rising temperatures, from 5,000 50 years ago to 25,000 today.
Bettina: But is it true that unlike Antarctica, the Arctic is melting?
Puls: It has been melting for 30 years. That also happened twice already in the last 150 years. The low point was reached in 2007 and the ice has since begun to recover. There have always been phases of Arctic melting. Between 900 AD and 1300 AD Greenland was green on the edges and the Vikings settled there.
Bettina: And what do you say about the alleged expanding deserts?
Puls: That doesn’t exist. For example, the Sahara is shrinking and has lost in the north an area as large as Germany over the last 20 years. The same is true in the South Sahara. The famine that struck Somalia, Kenya and Ethiopia was mainly caused by the leasing of large swathes of land to large international corporations so that they could grow crops for biofuels for Europe, and by war. But it is much easier for prosperous Europe to blame the world’s political failures on a fictional climate catastrophe instead.
Bettina: So we don’t need to do anything against climate change?
Puls: There’s nothing we can do to stop it. Scientifically, it is sheer absurdity to think we can get a nice climate by turning a CO2 adjustment knob. Many confuse environmental protection with climate protection. It’s impossible to protect the climate but we can protect the environment and our drinking water. On the debate concerning alternative energies, which is sensible, it is often driven by the irrational climate debate. One has nothing to do with the other.
One crisp winter morning in Sweden, a cute little girl named Greta woke up to a perfect world, one where there were no petroleum products ruining the earth She tossed aside her cotton sheet and wool blanket and stepped out onto a dirt floor covered with willow bark that had been pulverized with rocks.
“What’s this?” she asked.
“Pulverized willow bark,” replied her fairy godmother.
“What happened to the carpet?” she asked.
“The carpet was nylon, which is made from butadiene and hydrogen cyanide, both made from petroleum,” came the response.
Greta smiled, acknowledging that adjustments are necessary to save the planet, and moved to the sink to brush her teeth where instead of a toothbrush, she found a willow, mangled on one end to expose wood fibre bristles.
“Your old toothbrush?” noted her godmother, “Also nylon.”
“Where’s the water? asked Greta.
“Down the road in the canal,” replied her godmother, ‘Just make sure you avoid water with cholera in it”
“Why’s there no running water? ”Greta asked, becoming a little peevish.
“Well,” said her godmother, who happened to teach engineering at university, “Where do we begin?”
There followed a long monologue about how sink valves need elastomer seats and how copper pipes contain copper, which has to be mined and how it’s impossible to make all-electric earth-moving equipment with no gear lubrication or tires and how ore has to be smelted to a make metal, and that’s tough to do with only electricity as a source of heat, and even if you use only electricity, the wires need insulation, which is petroleum-based, and though most of Sweden’s energy is produced in an environmentally friendly way because of hydro and nuclear, if you do a mass and energy balance around the whole system, you still need lots of petroleum products like lubricants and nylon and rubber for tires and asphalt for filling potholes and wax and iPhone plastic and elastic to hold your underwear up while operating a copper smelting furnace and . . .
“What’s for breakfast?” interjected Greta, whose head was hurting.
“Fresh, range-fed chicken eggs,” replied her godmother. “Raw.”
“How so, raw?” inquired Greta.
“Well, . . .” And once again, Greta was told about the need for petroleum products like transformer oil and scores of petroleum products essential for producing metals for frying pans and in the end was educated about how you can’t have a petroleum-free world and then cook eggs.
Unless you rip your front fence up and start a fire and carefully cook your egg in an orange peel like you do in Boy Scouts. Not that you can find oranges in Sweden anymore.
“But I want poached eggs like my Aunt Tilda makes,” lamented Greta.
“Tilda died this morning,” the godmother explained. “Bacterial pneumonia.”
“What?!” interjected Greta. “No one dies of bacterial pneumonia! We have penicillin.”
“Not anymore,” explained godmother:
“The production of penicillin requires chemical extraction using isobutyl acetate, which, if you know your organic chemistry, is petroleum-based.
Lots of people are dying, which is problematic because there’s not any easy way of disposing of the bodies since backhoes need hydraulic oil and crematoriums can’t really burn many bodies using as fuel Swedish fences and furniture, which are rapidly disappearing – being used on the black market for roasting eggs and staying warm.”
This represents only a fraction of Greta’s day, a day without microphones to exclaim into and a day without much food, and a day without carbon-fibre boats to sail in, but a day that will save the planet. – contributed
According to the latest October report from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), the ice locked at Earth’s poles is, overall, GROWING.
Both NOAA and NASA appear to agree, if you read between the lines, with NOAA saying we’re entering a ‘full-blown’ Grand Solar Minimum in the late-2020s, and NASA seeing this upcoming solar cycle (25) as “the weakest of the past 200 years”, with the agency correlating previous solar shutdowns to prolonged periods of global cooling here.
Furthermore, we can’t ignore the slew of new scientific papers stating the immense impact The Beaufort Gyre could have on the Gulf Stream, and therefore the climate overall.
An independent candidate for the rural seat of Hill (SW Cairns) in October’s state election has harshly criticised a 2008 amendment to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act of 1975 that gives “wrongologists an escape clause for damage done to farmers by their questionable expertise and advice to government”.
Peter Campion of Tolga, a retired fireman, is a long-term climate change sceptic and energy realist who has been a regular contributor to the Cairns Post’s ‘Letters to the Editor’ column. Mr Campion is standing for Hill against the Katter Party’s Shane Knuth.
“The GPRMPA Act came about due to concerns for the Great Barrier Reef, which initially stemmed from early Reef tourism operators’ misunderstandings of natural reef systems and cycles – especially relating to the ‘gardeners of the Reef’, the Crown of Thorns starfish,” he said.
“The GBRMPA Act had been in operation for 33 years before Reef researchers felt the need to have an escape clause inserted.
“To me, that suggests that by 2008 they had realised there was a fair chance they were wrong.”
The amendment that has drawn Mr Campion’s scorn is in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2008, which inserts a “precautionary principle” clause.
“The amendment describes the precautionary principle as ‘… the principle that lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing a measure to prevent degradation of the environment where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage.’”, Mr Campion said.
“On the basis of this blatantly ridiculous ‘precautionary principle’ all farms , industries, towns, sewage systems, and roads should be closed as they all represent a threat to the environment.
“A better precautionary principle would be the proper Popperian scientific method that automatically assumes all science is only correct until such time as it is proved that it is not – which happens far more often than you’d think.
“It is just horrific to think that these scientists, who completely failed to produce their proof to the recent federal Senate inquiry into the Palaszczuk government’s anti-farmer reef regulations, suspected 12 years ago that their work might not be reliable. Why else would they lobby for an escape clause to give cover for their own malfeasance?” he said.
The scientists at the focus of Mr Campion’s anger, Ian Chubb, Geoff Garrett, and Ove Hoegh-Gulberg, took to the far-left website The Guardian to attack the Senate inquiry as a form of defence of their research. Notably this is the research that Professor Peter Ridd was sacked from JCU for suggesting might be unreliable.
Mr Campion noted, “In their own article they still had to admit that ‘little more than 3% of the coral’ may be negatively affected by water quality issues. That means 97 per cent of the Reef is unaffected, but they still want to impose draconian controls on our food producers.
“This is an outrage. These individuals, and their institutions, are unworthy of any further support from taxpayers and the Palaszczuk government’s anti-farmer Reef regulations must be repealed immediately.”
Email: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority: email@example.com
Queensland Premier: firstname.lastname@example.org
by Andrew Mackinnon
Did government agents light some of the multitude of fires?
The recent bush fires in New South Wales were deliberately lit in order to promote the idea that ‘climate change’ is the threat which caused them and that Australia therefore needs to enact policy to deal with ‘climate change’ so as to prevent further devastation.
It’s irrelevant who was caught lighting the fires, even if they were youths. These are third party intermediaries used for plausible deniability. The Australian government is behind the deliberate lighting of these fires.
Look at the flare up in the Jewish-controlled media linking the fires to ‘climate change’. It’s obvious. First, schoolchildren in Australia protested about ‘climate change’ and that fell flat. Then Greta Thunberg travelled to the United Nations in a yacht to protest about ‘climate change’ and that fell flat because nobody wants to be lectured by a sixteen year old girl being fed a bunch of lines by adult propagandists.
So, the people who want policy to be enacted in Australia regarding ‘climate change’ said to each other, “They ignored the schoolchildren. They even ignored Greta! Let’s give them something they can’t ignore.”
Australian citizens voted Liberal over Labor at the last federal election because they didn’t want the action on ‘climate change’ that Labor was promoting. The majority think that ‘carbon dioxide-driven climate change’ is a fraud, like I do. (Carbon dioxide exists in the earth’s atmosphere at less than 400 parts per million, which is less than 1 part per 2,500, so it doesn’t influence the climate to any appreciable extent.) Australians voted the Liberal Party into federal government at the last federal election earlier this year because it’s the lesser of two very bad evils. Scott Morrison is an appalling Prime Minister but Bill Shorten would have been twice as bad.
The Liberal Party pretends to be opposed to action on ‘climate change’ when it actually supports it and wants it. It knows that the majority of Australian citizens don’t trust the ‘climate change’ agenda, so it’s pretended to adopt the same mistrust in order to win their support. Therefore, if it’s going to be successful enacting policy on ‘climate change’, it needs to resort to indirect methods of lobbying the citizenry, such as deliberately lighting bush fires and then relying on the media to push the narrative that ‘climate change’ is the reason for the fires. The Liberal Party wants to end up in a position in which it is seen as having no choice but to enact policy to deal with ‘climate change’, since ‘climate change’ has become universally recognised as a threat by the citizenry due to high-impact incidents like the bush fires in New South Wales.
The Liberal Party supports action on ‘climate change’ because its allegiance is to the Rothschilds-led synagogue of Satan that needs action on ‘climate change’ in countries around the world in order to provide an excuse for establishing world government ruling over various unions around the world like the European Union, the African Union and the South American Union. There is a planned Asia Pacific Union including China, India and Australia, as well as other Asian countries. There is also a planned North American Union including the United States of America, Canada and Mexico. ‘Climate change’ is the fabricated threat to the entire world which the synagogue of Satan will claim, can only be properly addressed with common policies and methodologies enforced and implemented by world government.
The Rothschilds-led synagogue of Satan has been pushing the fraudulent ‘climate change’ agenda in earnest since 2008 and it’s had this issue on the boil for the past three decades and longer.
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.
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.”
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.”