Monday, 9 May 2016

Malcolm Roberts and Pauline Hanson

by Anthony Cox

I attended a talk given by Malcolm Roberts on the 5th May 2016. Malcolm has been a real trouper in his quest to reveal the lies, manipulations and waste of man-made global warming (AGW). Using his impressive credentials and real world experience, Malcolm has distilled his research into a simple and devastating critique: AGW has no empirical evidence to support it. 

Science is based on empirical evidence. If there is no empirical evidence to support a science theory then it is not science. And this is the point about AGW: it is an ideological imposition on Western society and the world. As Malcolm noted the IPCC has openly declared that the purpose of AGW is to change the economicstructure of the Western world and to redistribute Western wealth.

Malcolm explained simply that human emissions of CO2 have no impact on overall concentrations of CO2, that atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are almost entirely natural and that CO2 is dependent on temperature, not the other way around as claimed by AGW. In short AGW has no basis. This
complete absence of evidence has not stopped the world governments via the UN spending $trillions on what is in effect a method by the UN to implement its ideology.

Both sides of politics in this country, the ALP/Greens and the Coalition, are locked into the lies of the UN. There is no opposition to this destructive state of affairs. To provide a much needed political opposition Malcolm has teamed up with Pauline Hanson to run for the senate in Queensland.

The Climate Sceptics are prepared to endorse Malcolm in Queensland and are inviting all past members and anyone who is concerned about AGW continuing to drain the economic wealth of this nation to support Malcolm and Pauline in Queensland.


Note also that, in the seat of Dobell on the central coast of NSW, broadcaster, motivational speaker, staff trainer, compere, vocalist and versatile all round entertainer Carter Edwards is standing for One Nation in the lower house.


  1. I applaud your efforts. You will be up against a vile opposition that does not embrace Reason. I highly recommend and beg you to read a series of posts at anonymousconservative. If you read and understand these posts, you will better understand your opposition. If believe these people are operating under the same principles of fairness and truth seeking that you do, then you will fail.

  2. Jeffrey Pope said:
    I applaud your efforts. You will be up against a vile opposition that does not embrace Reason.

    I also applaud your efforts, however 'teaming up' with the One Nation party will only provide the two major parties and their ignorant, indoctrinated AGW proponent followers (i.e. most Oz voters), yet another good reason to further ridicule us as 'climate change DENIERS'.
    Sorry, but I don't think it's a very wise move in this nasty, one sided game where there are really no rules, at least rules that are FAIR or 'democratic', such as freedom of speech being permitted.
    This Climate change issue has not even 'divided the nation', it's much more like a totalitarian state, where anyone who dares dissent will be punished (by the neo Nazi climate fascists running the country), or at the very least, will be scapegoated and ridiculed by the remaining majority of BELIEVERS.
    Remember under the current political structure, there is NO DEMOCRACY. We are about to be plunged into a totalitarian state, along with the rest of Western society, which in reality is the main objective of the entire AGW scare campaign and the propaganda has been frighteningly effective and gathering ever more momentum as the hysteria ramps up..

    I don't really know what the solution is, but this is certainly NOT the way to go.
    Pauline Hanson, as much as I admire her tenacity and gumption, is unfortunately, the laughing stock of Australia's voting public, i.e. that massive flock of sheeple who BELIEVE and therefore follow, the AGW mantra.

    The bottom line is: similarly to how they've been hoodwinked by the climate change scare campaign, (where their lack of understanding has been exploited): most Australians still regard Pauline Hanson as a bigot, simply because they focused on the (unpopular) POLITICALLY INCORRECT agendas of her earlier campaigns, thus still associate her politics (and One Nation) with ignorance.
    We want to be taken SERIOUSLY.

  3. I despair that the role of legitimate pier reviewed research is not respected by climate skeptics. Your organisation will remain irrelevant if it continues to peddle 'snake oil' as evidence. I challenge you to publish this response, I would prefer to sign with my personal details, however I'd feel very uncomfortable as your organisation attacks unwelcome criticism.
    Good day to you.

  4. Gee...."your organisation attacks unwelcome criticism. " Is that a back-handed way to say "Please don't be critical of my idiotic comment?"

    You say "legitimate pier reviewed research is not respected by climate skeptics."

    Did you mean pier or perhaps peer? The empirical evidence support the realist side of the debate.

    The AGW hypothesis has been falsified.

  5. You are all out of your depth. How can you possibly believe that 4 (even 10) years of research on climate science (so claimed by Malcom Roberts) can challenge the trends identified by thousands of hours of disciplined research and cross-checked monitoring by thousands of scientists worldwide. Empirical evidence is in spades: results of over 40 years of monitoring atmospheric, terrestrial, marine and aquatic environments. Your challenge of the AGW (whatever that is) hypothesis completely lacks empirical evidence. It is a flawed critique promulgated by people who are not willing to get out there and do the hard work of gaining appropriate measurements. It's called getting your hands dirty. Get real!

  6. Actually, 'our people' as you call them, use empirical evidence, use the appropriate measurements. The alarmist scientists use models and their models have shown to be wrong

    See eg

    Could show you much more but perhaps "you are all out of your depth."


All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!