Saturday, 9 February 2013

CSIR-Oh! Oh Dear!

NCTCS blog recently received an email from one of the co-founders of the Galileo Movement, John Smeed.
John and his friend Case Smit are heroes of this NCTCS blogger.
The Galileo movement has been formed by two amazing men. This daring pair of retired engineers risked their own money to promote the (first) Australian tour for Lord Christopher Monckton. (link)

The NO CARBON TAX Climate Sceptics Party Promoted Lord Monckton's Second Australian tour to Eastern Australia and, in co-operation with our associated body, The Lord Monckton Foundation  we are presenting our current Australian tour of Lord Monckton. (For details, see link above.)

John Smeed and Case Smit then set up the Galileo Movement.   They invited Malcolm Roberts to be their Project Leader.

Recently Malcolm has had a discourse with an ABC presenter called STEVE Austin and he linked various others in his email."
To: StephenAustin
Cc: TonyDelroy,KellyHiggins-Devine,Michael
Spencer , Vanessa Wiltshire , Geraldine Doogue , Tony Jones , Fran Kelly , Kerry O'Brien , Margot O'Neill

Initially Malcolm describes his "road to Damascus."
Nonetheless, I was initially overawed by the might of the army of scientists purportedly arrayed in support of the notion that human carbon dioxide production was threatening our planet with catastrophic damage. How can 'little 'ol me be right against this army of scientists and celebraties and politicians'? Surely, 'I must be wrong'? 

Yet I trusted my instinct. Rather than just argue irresponsibly though, I devoted a considerable portion of the last (few) years researching for myself. That included attending The First International Conference on Climate Change in New York in March, 2008 addressed by the world's eminent climate scientists. I felt their passion and that surprised me. I discovered that many of the scientists denouncing the UN IPCC (the government's basis for its climate policies) were UN IPCC

I felt reassured, invigorated, determined. 
Malcolm went on to examine a report from the CSIRO.

Steve Austin invited a management consultant’s review of CSIRO’s document entitled The Science of Tackling Climate Change. He specifies that the report is, quote “The official CSIRO document provided by the head of CSIRO, Dr Megan Clarke. As you know CSIRO1 had a great number of scientist [sic] contributed to the IPCC report, as Dr Clarke told the National Press Club in Canberra late 2009. I interviewed the Chief Executive of the CSIRO Dr Clarke recently and she made it quite clear that they stood by their research and the data they have provided that supports the general concerns about sea levels rises, shifting climate and water data.”
My brief from Steve Austin is to, quote: “Please read through the Australian scientific paper and identify where you believe the CSIRO data has been falsified or is wrong.”
So Malcolm accepted the Challenge:

Work started immediately on reviewing CSIRO’s report. My review progressively uncovered ever more disturbing insights into CSIRO and the global warming industry. Investigation eventually led to the inescapable conclusion that Australia’s national governance is threatened.
Consequently this report was prepared for all members of Australia’s national parliament. It’s being posted to each MP via Registered Post with Delivery Confirmation.
It would be interesting to know how many of Australia's Parliament responded to Malcolm's Registered Post - How Many Labor Parliamentarians, how many Coalition parliamentarians, whether the independents, Oakeshott, Windsor, and other less independent independents also responded.

Surely, in a democracy, all parliamentary members would answer such a well-researched paper as Malcolm's.

The original paper, for all you who are hearing about it for the first time, and for the parliamentarians who missed the first notice can be found at!.html

If you still believe that the "S" in CSIRO stands for "Scientific," dodge!.html with all your might.

No comments:

Post a comment

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