The ‘science’ behind AGW has been rebutted. Jo Nova and I presented a number of articles reviewing recent research which shows AGW is fatally flawed.
That AGW science and its doomsday predictions are flawed is starting to be picked up by some of the MSM. The Mail Online’s expose of the MET’s admission that AGW had stopped for 16 years led to all sorts of qualifications and rejections by the pro-AGW forces; but for now this stands:
One of the denials of this fact was that at least 17 years were needed before a climatic trend could be isolated; this is confirmed by leading AGW scientist, Ben Santer. Which should mean that if there is no temperature trend consistent with AGW in 2013 then AGW should pack up its mouldy bags, ridiculous end of the world scenarios and most of all, huge financial demands and bugger off.
Of course it won’t because there are still too many MSM outlets who will not admit any defects in their pet theory; in Australia that would be the ABC, a taxpayer funded media outlet which arguably should be closed and the Fairfax organisation which probably will be closed because of dwindling readership.
Then there is the money; $10’s of billions wasted on this scam. You can’t turn around without tripping over some spiv with his hand out to the witless government demanding funding for a green energy scheme which no one has done due diligence about, or if they have, have ignored the consequences when the green entrepreneur falls in a heap such as the fiasco in Tasmania when Wood and Cameron bought Triabunna woodchip mill.
Fairfax and the ABC never present the avalanche of evidence to show AGW and Green energy are failed and very expensive ideas. Take the Gergis debacle. When this paper was first publicised by its senior author Karoly, the ABC and Fairfax were all over it like a rash. When the paper was revealed to be a statistical mess there was no retraction or reanalysis.
In this way the MSM has presented an uncritical picture of AGW from day one. The method is to publicise every new paper; and when later the paper is once again revealed to be phony or flawed, ignore it. The casual reader will have an accumulative picture of a constant and sustained build-up of vindicating AGW science because none of the contrary evidence is presented. This has been a massive lie by omission.
As I say, there are many who argue the ABC should be closed.
And what about this government? Its carbon tax is in tatters with the ABS admitting it will not be able to quantify the impact of carbon pricing, compensation or other government incentives and will not be producing estimates of price change exclusive of the carbon price or measuring the impact of the carbon price.
How extraordinary is that; the official measurement of a government policy cannot or will not be done!
The only people who will know about the impact of the carbon tax will be the citizens paying their electricity bills and dealing with the inflationary effect.
Every aspect of the carbon tax has been wrapped in deceit and lies. When it was first introduced the usual culprits, Wong, Combet and the misogyny magnet herself, Gillard, all claimed the carbon tax would have no effect on either consumers or coalmines. This was and still is duplicity itself because the purpose of the tax is to first make coal based electricity too dear and then to stop it all together.
That simple contradiction has never been picked up by the MSM.
Both sides of politics in Australia are pro the Renewable Energy Target [RET] where effective, efficient and affordable fossil energy is replaced by green energy which does not work. The Coalition and Abbott are still advocating the RET. This is destructive because the RET is likely to more expensive than the carbon tax.
So while ever the Coalition supports the RET Australia cannot be said to be free from the curse and lie of AGW even though the AGW science has failed. The only political party which will scrap both the RET and the carbon tax is the NO CARBON TAX Climate Sceptics [NCTCS]. If people want to be free of AGW they should seriously consider voting NCTCS at the next election.