Where are the CO2 haters?
Letter to the editor
Australia faces Christmas heatwave with record temperature up to 47C forecast.
Sadly another baloney forecast.
In 1915 the Murray River dried up—it has never done that since.
Explorer, Charles Sturt’s Records show in 1828 it was a blistering 53.9 °C. In January 1896 a savage blast “like a furnace” stretched across Australia from east to west and lasted for weeks. The death toll reached 437 people in the eastern states. Newspaper reports showed that in Bourke the heat approached 120°F (48.9°C) on three days—long before industrialisation.
The Great Drought, and subsequent Global Famine between 1875 and 1878, ravaged India, China and parts of Africa and South America, killed an estimated 50 Million people.
Was that climate change or not?
No, it couldn’t have been because it was natural climatic variation long before industrialisation.
G J May
Paris Climate Party agrees . . . to have another Party
By Viv Forbes, Science Writer
Premature Celebrations by Sceptics
Many climate sceptics are celebrating that “nothing in the Paris deal is legally binding”. They should look deeper. They have suffered a huge political defeat.
Skeptics are winning the climate science debate, but the main battle is no longer about facts and science – it is about propaganda and politics. There were few scientists at COP21 talking about atmospheric physics – just politicians, bureaucrats and green activists discussing emission targets, carbon taxes, climate reparations and who will pay.
The Paris party organisers managed to assemble representatives of 196 nations with the aim of getting 100% agreement on something/anything that would assist their clandestine campaign for world government and world taxes. This process will cripple the industrial power and political freedom of the Western democracies. They achieved agreement because of leadership by UN loving Western centralists like Obama, Merkel, Cameron, Hollande, Trudeau and Turnbull, helped by misguided theologians, and supported by vested interests in mendicant nations and some powerful competitors of the West. They spent two weeks reworking the draft document until there was nothing in it that offended any nation. Most of them wanted their benefits clauses made compulsory, but the would-be-providers of such largesse dared not sign obviously binding liabilities because the media and their home electorates were watching.
The UN game plan is for this massive global climate circus to meet regularly in pleasant locations, setting illusory targets, generating publicity and seeking even more green levers to pull. So there is only one legally binding clause – an agreement to table targets, and to meet again.