Friday, 31 October 2014

Majority of Scientists Sceptical of Man made Global Warming

James Taylor for Forbes reports on a new  survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies.
Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. 
Oh no! Not again. How many times do we have to rebut the false consensus; like here and here.

But wait, there's more.
Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.
That's right, a strong majority believe that nature is the primary cause of global warming. The survey divides the responses into five groups; only one group expressed a strong belief that humans are the cause of global warming.
One interesting aspect of this new survey is the unmistakably alarmist bent of the survey takers. They frequently use terms such as “denier” to describe scientists who are skeptical of an asserted global warming crisis, and they refer to skeptical scientists as “speaking against climate science” rather than “speaking against asserted climate projections.” Accordingly, alarmists will have a hard time arguing the survey is biased or somehow connected to the ‘vast right-wing climate denial machine.’ 
Another interesting aspect of this new survey is that it reports on the beliefs of scientists themselves rather than bureaucrats who often publish alarmist statements without polling their member scientists. We now have meteorologists, geoscientists and engineers all reporting that they are skeptics of an asserted global warming crisis, yet the bureaucrats of these organizations frequently suck up to the media and suck up to government grant providers by trying to tell us the opposite of what their scientist members actually believe.

Read more at Forbes - HERE  -Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis

Thursday, 30 October 2014

NIWA Wrong in Making Temperature Warmer

By Anthony Cox

In 2012 Judgement was given in a case where the New Zealand equivalent of the Bureau of Meteorology, NIWA, was accused of adjusting temperature data to make the record warmer; the decision went against the litigants because the Judge said he had to believe the better scientific credentials of NIWA; see:

Now a new paper has come out written by prominent scientists who have equal qualifications to the NIWA scientists which supports the case against NIWA for wrongly making temperature warmer: (See footnote)

Just as in Australia with BOM we see NZ having its temperature record wrongly made warmer.

It’s a pity this new paper was not available to the litigants against NIWA.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

A Reanalysis of Long-Term Surface Air Temperature Trends in New Zealand * by C.R. de Freitas, M.O. Dedekind and B.E. Brill.
A research paper on the homogenisation of the temperature record in New Zealand, reducing the current official rate of 0.9°C per century to 0.3°C, has just been published in the international scientific journal Environmental Modeling and Assessment.

British Climate Change Act was a Profound Mistake

British Press Release:

It is now 6 years to the day since the House of Commons voted for the Climate Change Bill at Third Reading, by a majority of 465 to 5. The five of us have seen nothing in the intervening 6 years to change our view that the Climate Change Act was a profound mistake. It is time to bring to an end the pointless damage being inflicted on British households, British industry and the British economy by the unilateral commitment to unnecessarily expensive energy, and to suspend the Climate Change Act's unilateral targets until such time as a binding global agreement has been secured. -- Christopher Chope MP, 
- Phillip Davies MP, 
- Peter Lilley MP, 
- Andrew Tyrie MP, 
- Ann Widdecombe (MP 1987 - 2010), 28 October 2014

Britain faces a dark winter and Ann Widdicombe who has since left Parliament writes for the UK Express:

The climate change rebels were spot on

This week I returned to the House of Commons to join the other four for an anniversary dinner. Andrew Tyrie, Peter Lilley, Christopher Chope and Philip Davies are still there fighting the nonsense but I have simply joined the ranks of the long-suffering British public who view the increasing “lights will go out” stories with grim foreboding. 
Support for the then Labour Government’s bill was all part of Cameron’s campaign to “modernise” the Tory Party. It was the same campaign which saw him driving huskies and putting a ridiculous wind turbine on his roof so he was pretty displeased with the five of us but we were right. Oh, so right.
The wretched Bill committed us, at huge expense, to reduce the UK’s carbon emissions by a staggering 80 per cent
Ann Widdecombe
The wretched Bill committed us, at huge expense, to reduce the UK’s carbon emissions by a staggering 80 per cent. Yet that was supposed to be part of a global agreement and, as was easily foreseeable, there has been no such agreement but we have soldiered on despite accounting for about 2 per cent of all the world’s emissions. We have shunned the obvious answer of nuclear power in favour of vast, ugly, inefficient, bird-mashing wind farms which benefit none but those who take the subsidies from them. The phrase “political correctness gone mad” could have been invented for this stupidity alone. 

Monday, 27 October 2014

Windmill Disaster - Do we need RETS?

Wind Turbine Exploding.
Do you know how big those pieces are?
Why aren't the Greens supporting the environment?

Why do we keep finding things like

Have the "Greens" ever complained, ever protested about the killing of bats and birds?


Are the Greens  concerned about the detrimental harm to people caused by this inefficient form of energy creation?


Well, are the "Greens" and the other political parties who bow to idiotic "Green" ideology concerned about human health....bat and bird killings...


~ They have been confused by the stupid "Green" Ideology.

and wait - there is more:-

Windmills breaking up are dangerous! See this vid

Sunday, 26 October 2014

Activists and scientists debate climate change

Professor Don Easterbrook
An event at the Vancouver Community Library debating man made climate change occurred on Oct 23 with three sceptical scientist debating three alarmist activists.

Ryan Rittenhouse, a local activist; Daphne Wysham, a climate policy fellow at the Center for Sustainable Economy; and Kyle Dittmer, a hydrologist and meteorologist (correspondence course from the back of a cereal packet) with the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission.

Three panelists will make the case against human-caused climate change: Don Easterbrook, a geology professor at Western Washington University; Nils Morner, a retired professor at Stockholm University; and Gordon Fulks, an astrophysicist.

The debate was organised by local activist Don Steinke and Vancouver City Council member (and Global Warming Realist) Bill Turlay. 

Dr Don Easterbrook at around 30 minutes in the video linked below presented 10 Facts about global warming.

He began by saying (as this blog has been saying for years) Global Warming is real so don’t call us climate deniers!

Proven Facts
  1. No global warming has occurred in the past 18 years - Increased global cooling has occurred over the past 10 years;
  2. Antarctic ice is increasing and has reached an all-time high;
  3. 85% of the past 10,000 years were warmer than present;
  4. CO2 is not capable of creating significant global warming;
  5. IPCC climate models have failed miserably (not even close);
  6. NOAA, NASA, HADLEY  tamper with data – no longer credible;
  7. Extreme weather events declining – lowest in 10 years;
  8. Five of the six snowiest winters on record have occurred since 2003;
  9. The rate of sea level rise is 7 inches per century;
  10. The oceans are alkaline, not acid, and will never be acid

Link to video made by Global Warming Realist Jim Karlock - Click Here

Wednesday, 22 October 2014

Ocean Warming - Peer-reviewed paper retracted

From Retraction Watch:

Article using tin foil, cling wrap to debunk ocean warming retracted after urgent peer review

A conference proceedings paper that attempted to debunk ocean warming due to climate change using tin foil and cling wrap has been retracted by the Wessex Institute of Technology (WIT) Press. 
The paper, “A Comparison Of The Efficacy Of Greenhouse Gas Forcing And Solar Forcing,” was published as part of the proceedings of a July 2014 conference in Spain called Heat Transfer 2014. 
Here’s what author Robert (Bob) A. Irvine, about whom we haven’t been able to find information, claimed to have done in the paper:
Basically, two tubs of warm water, one under a clear cling wrap roof and one under a reflective foil roof, are allowed to cool. In test A they are both free to evaporate and both cool at the same rate. In test B evaporation is restricted by placing cling wrap on the surface of the water in both tubs. In test B the tub under the foil sky is significantly affected by downward long wave radiation and cools more slowly.
Read More at retraction Watch HERE

Tuesday, 21 October 2014

Ex-Greenpeace Patrick Moore with Alan Jones

This blog has posted before why Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore left the movement after it was infiltrated by the Communists (LINK) and that he is visiting Australia (Tour Dates)

Enjoy his interview with Alan Jones: Alan Jones interviews Patrick Moore.

Monday, 20 October 2014

Follow the Money - deserting the Alarm

Source: Jacques Velleman
Follow the money is a catchphrase made popular by the movie All the President's Men. In the movie it was aimed at political corruption. Show me the Money was a phrase from the film Jerry Maguire

Stop Wasting Money on the IPCC was a column by Viv Forbes of the Carbon Sense coalition.


Money makes the world go around!

When MoneyNews, the Financial Section of Newsmax, wakes up to the Man-made Global Warming Hoax, the Alarmists should start looking for another career before their current career careers into oblivion.

They ask:
How much has the world really warmed? 
It’s an important question, considering the U.S. government spends $22 billion a year to fight the global warming crisis (twice as much as it spends protecting our border). 
To put that in perspective, that is $41,856 every minute going to global warming initiatives. But, according to Forbes columnist Larry Bell, the ripple effect of global warming initiatives actually costs Americans $1.75 trillion . . . every year.
So, has anyone stopped to ask . . . how much has the globe actually warmed?
Well, we asked, and what we found was striking.

Now they examine the data, the real world data - not the false reality of climate modelling. This blog has previously posted the fact that their has been no significant warming for over 18 years and that their has been cooling this century.

MoneyNews then quotes another Financial Publication.

The Wall Street Journal went as far as to say, “The assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction.” Forbes headlined “Global Warming Alarmists Caught Doctoring ’97% Consensus’ Claims.”
Suggested Reading for You: A former White House adviser and NASA consultant reveals startling proof that the global warming faction is hiding the truth . . . and gets attacked. Click Here. 

Sunday, 19 October 2014

John Cook cooking - er sorry - uncooking the temperature data

Cartoonist John Cook in his comical blog UNSkeptical UNScience tells us that increased sea ice in Antarctica is due to warming....yep....warming of the Southern Ocean.

Can he really believe that, or is that a line from one of his comics?
The most common misconception regarding Antarctic sea ice is that sea ice is increasing because it's cooling around Antarctica. ...... The reality is the Southern Ocean surrounding Antarctica has shown strong warming over the same period that sea ice has been increasing. (Link)
 Not a lot of people know that has revealed the truth:
Cook forgets that some of us know how to check the data.
Bob Tisdale produces analyses of sea surface teperatures each month, and these have shown that the Southern Ocean has been getting considerable colder since 1981, and particularly in the last 8 years.

Source: Bob Tisdale

Saturday, 18 October 2014

Poverty is the aim; sell fossil-fuel stocks for largest price.

From Real Clear Markets on the fossil-fuel sector:
The fossil-fuel sector is huge---about $5 trillion in market capitalization---because other sectors demand energy, and fossil fuels overwhelmingly are the most efficient forms with which to provide it. So if investment in fossil-fuel sectors engenders some sort of moral quandary, does the same principle apply to investment in industries that use energy? After all, they are responsible for the very existence of the energy producers; will the divestment campaign expand to agriculture, manufacturing, transportation, retailing, the household sector, and all the rest? Is investment in government bonds the only moral course? Well, no: Government too uses vast amounts of energy.
In the item Benjamin Zycher  writes that over 175 institutions, local governments, and individuals, with a total of over $50 billion in assets, as of last month have pledged to sell their investments in fossil-fuel industries. Benjamin notes that for "sell" they use the curious term "divest."

How far down the chain will these divesting bodies go:

So if investment in fossil-fuel sectors engenders some sort of moral quandary, does the same principle apply to investment in industries that use energy? After all, they are responsible for the very existence of the energy producers; will the divestment campaign expand to agriculture, manufacturing, transportation, retailing, the household sector, and all the rest? Is investment in government bonds the only moral course? Well, no: Government too uses vast amounts of energy.
Is the aim poverty?
And let us not stop there: Precisely why do all sectors demand energy? Obviously, it is because people demand the goods and services made affordable by fossil fuels. Notice that the correlation between energy consumption and household income is high, and rises as income increases; for the bottom three U.S. income quintiles, the respective correlations are 0.75, 0.85, and 0.91. If fossil fuels are evil, so are rising incomes, as the latter drive up the demand for the former. So let us be very clear that one central implication of the divestment campaign---remember, it is a moral imperative---is the desirability of poverty as a tool with which to dampen energy demands and thus incentives to invest in fossil-fuel sectors. This is separate from the impoverishing effect of a substitution of expensive energy in place of conventional energy produced with fossil fuels. 
Poverty for the people not the institutions and governments:
"Divest" is a curious term; a simpler verb is "sell," and it is a source of some interest that the divesting institutions and individuals are pledging to do so within three to five years. Why not just give the assets away immediately on a first-come/first-serve basis? The obvious answer is that those divesting---selling---the fossil-fuel assets prefer to get the highest prices that they can, an objective not obviously consistent with the purported moral imperative underlying a shift out of fossil fuels and toward the "new energy economy," about which more below. 
Read more at Real Clear Markets.

Friday, 17 October 2014

Greenpeace Co-founder Patrick Moore: Greenpeace is evil.

Just before he embarks on his Down-under tour (See tour schedule HERE) , Patrick Moore has labelled the body he co-founded - Greenpeace - as evil and guilty of losing its humanitarian roots.

From the MailOnLine:
  • •  Co-founder Patrick Moore says organisation doesn't care about people
  • •  He cites example of a GM-rice which would help millions if widely produced
  • •  Dr Moore says fact that Greenpeace oppose crop shows it is 'evil'
  • •  Comes after the ecologist quit the group because it became 'too political'

  • Ecologist Dr Patrick Moore, who quit Greenpeace in 1986, has launched a scathing criticism of the activist group, which he insisted has lost its humanitarian roots. 
His attack on the organisation he helped create comes as former Environment Secretary Owen Paterson campaigns against the 'self-serving' and 'highly-paid' network of environmental pressure groups he calls the 'green blob'.  (LINK)
Dr Moore told BBC Radio 4's Today Programme: 'My problem with Greenpeace is they have lost any humanitarian roots they had. 
'When we started Greenpeace it was to stop nuclear war and the destruction of human civilisation, that of course is the "peace" in Greenpeace. 
'The "green" is the environment and that's good as well, but they lost the concerns for humans... They have turned, basically, into an evil organisation.'
Read More HERE

Australia's Green Obsession

Green 'blob"
English Ex-Minister Owen Paterson is more aware of the Climate Scam than most of the Australian Ministry.

Australia has a Green obsession in the Main Stream Media; the Greens Party (obviously); in most of the Labor Party but also in at least half of the Liberal/National Party.

The Mail-On-Line Reports:

Owen Paterson accuses ministers of raising energy prices for the poor
  • •  Former Environment Secretary said support for flawed wind and solar power cost   billions and made electricity and gas needlessly expensive
  • •  He called on Whitehall to was to scrap the Climate Change Act
  • •  Warned claims of impending environmental disaster were 'exaggerated'
The former Environment Secretary attacked a so-called ‘green blob’ at the heart of Government yesterday – accusing Whitehall officials and ministers of raising energy prices for the poor. 
Owen Paterson said their support for flawed wind and solar power cost billions and made electricity and gas needlessly expensive 
He said the ‘green blob’ included civil servants and quangos in thrall to the climate change and environmental lobby. He claimed it had blocked him from prioritising shale gas exploration as a more efficient way to secure energy for the future. 
Mr Paterson, who was removed as Environment Secretary in July, said the only way to ‘keep the lights on’ was to scrap the Climate Change Act, which requires the UK to use more renewable energy and is backed by civil servants.
Meanwhile, the LNP Government paid a token tribute to the majority of citizens aware of the Falsified AGW Hoax by scrapping the Carbon (dioxide) tax but leaving in place a plethora of other Green "blobs" including the citizen-punishing Renewable Energy Targets. To misquote Paterson: the only way to ‘keep the lights on’ was to scrap the Renewable Energy Targets.

Thursday, 16 October 2014

Even Giant Squids Hate Greenpeace

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer reports on Front Page Mag: Full Report Here

Even Giant Squids Hate Greenpeace

I don’t usually side with the giant squids. Between all the tentacles, the beak and their bad breath, it’s hard to sympathize with them. But when giant squids take on Greenpeace, we all win.
Full Report  HERE

See also Greenpeace Dropout Patrick Moore's tour dates HERE.

Wednesday, 15 October 2014

Merchants of Smear

Are the IPCC shills?
WHO are the real shills paid by the fossil fuel industry?

In a new Heartland Policy brief, Russell Cook says that, sceptical scientists
or, as he calls them, "prominent climate scientists" are routinely denounced as “shills” paid by the fossil fuel industry to spread lies and misinformation.

Wikipedia describes a Shill: (Link)
shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization.

AND who was publicly pushing the aim of one world government using the falsified AGW hypothesis? The IPCC, that's who.

Trouble is, the more mud  the real shills, the Alarmists, throw, the more it sticks. The mud should be thrown the other way:
The truth, however, has every appearance of being exactly the opposite: A clumsy effort to manufacture doubt about the credibility of skeptical clim(Rebuttedate scientists arose in 1991 with roots in Al Gore’s Senate office; it gained effectiveness and media traction after Ozone Action took over the effort and drew attention to the “reposition global warming as theory rather than fact” memo phrase (which they never showed in its full context); and the effort achieved its highest success after being heavily promoted by the “Pulitzer-winning investigative reporter” Ross Gelbspan, who never won a Pulitzer, never displayed any investigative prowess in this matter, and never proved that any skeptic climate scientist had ever knowingly lied as a result of being paid illicit money.
This blog and others have previously reveals the truth:
There are dozens of other examples.

Russleel Cook finishes with

The main pillar of support for the notion that humans are causing a dangerous warming of the climate has been the notion of “settled science.” That notion has long been questioned (rebutted! -Ed) by skeptic scientists. The secondary pillar of support for the alarmist global warming theory has been the notion that industry-corrupted skeptics are unworthy of public consideration. This accusation could easily have been investigated and refuted long ago. That never happened, because of the third pillar: Journalists should not give equal time to skeptic scientists. 
We are overdue for the biggest ideology collapse in history, begging for an investigation into why the mainstream media and influential politicians apparently never checked the veracity of claims about “settled science” and “corrupt skeptics.”

Monday, 13 October 2014



IPCC Expert Reviewer Vincent Gray

OCTOBER  15th 2014


The climate is always changing and these changes are presented to us every night on the weather forecast.

They provide beautiful animated charts for the local climate and for the global climate on which they plot thousands of measurements of air pressure, wind speed and direction, temperature, humidity, cyclones, anticyclones, precipitation. hurricanes and many more.

They are in a form from which it is possible to see how both the local and the global climate  will change in the next few days and weeks and it also shows how the complexity is such that forecasts beyond this begin to become impossible.

Carbon Dioxide is not one of the measurements used because it has no influence on the  climate.

Global temperatures have been little changed for 18 years. Over the same time carbon dioxide concentrations have increased. The two quantities are obviously unrelated.

All other climate change claims are based on the false assumption that the earth is warming. It is not.

The ice  in Antarctica is at a record size. The Antarctic Peninsula is being melted by an underwater volcano. 

Temperature in the Arctic is controlled by cyclic ocean variability not by the atmosphere.

Floods droughts and heat waves have a lot to do with human inability to maintain water supply and drainage for an increasingly more wealthy population.

Sea level is only increasing because there are no corrections for the upward bias of the individual records.

Parts of the ocean emit carbon dioxide and there is no evidence that this is harmful. Increases will merely benefit those creatures that use it to build their house. Any extra will be welcome.

The  models are all absurd.

The earth is not flat. 

The sun does not shine at night.

No part is ever in equilibrium and energy is never balanced.

Some energy is used to maintain living organisms including ourselves.

Most energy interchange on the earth is by conduction, convection, and latent heat change, not radiation.

There is simply no evidence that carbon dioxide harms the climate. The IPCC has never supplied any. 


Vincent Gray
Wellington 6035
New Zealand

Sunday, 12 October 2014

Patrick Moore’s Public Appearances in Australia - UPDATED

Short biography - Dr. Patrick Moore

Dr. Patrick Moore has been a leader in the international environmental field for over 40 years. He is a co-founder of Greenpeace and served for nine years as President of Greenpeace Canada and seven years as a Director of Greenpeace International. The leader of many Greenpeace campaigns (e.g. “Save the Whales”, seal hunting), he was a member of the Rainbow Warrior crew when the anti-nuclear testing ship was bombed in Auckland Harbour.  Dr. Moore was a driving force shaping policy and direction while Greenpeace became the world's largest environmental activist organization.

He left Greenpeace in 1986 because of his concern at the anti-science and extreme political policies it was adopting; nevertheless, he remains passionately concerned about the environment and describes himself as a “sensible environmentalist”. This, of course makes him a most controversial figure as the current Greenpeace policies are not aligned with his “sensible” view.  He is visiting Australia to explain why his view of catastrophic global warming differs from that of the extreme green movement.

Patrick Moore is an engaging, articulate and intelligent speaker. His story should be of great interest, particularly now that authorities such as the Bureau of Meteorology are being publicly questioned about their handling of temperature records.

Dr. Patrick Moore

In this Youtube Video, Patrick Moore can be seen giving a presentation at the International Conference on Climate Change in July 2014:

Patrick Moore’s Public Appearances in Australia

21Oct:  Booking time: 12:00-13:00
Venue: Carslaw Lecture Theatre 373       VENUE MAP:

22 Oct. 5 for 5:30 City of Sydney RSL, L3 Function Room, 565 George St. a $20 donation at the door is requested to cover costs.  Patrick Moore will be joined by prominent climate scientist Bob Carter. Please email:

23 Oct. 6:30 pm for 7pm The Mirrors Room, Club Five Dock, 66 Great North Road, Five Dock  a $20 donation ($10 for students) is requested at the door to cover costs ; rsvp: Jim Simpson – 0417 285 884 or

24 Oct.   5 for 5:30pm CQ Functions, 113 Queen St, a $20 donation at the door is requested to cover costs
27 Oct.   12 for 12:30 The Australian Club 110 William St 2-course lunch $110 p.p. (dress code)

30 Oct.
·      1st Session 2-3pm   afternoon tea 3-30 pm,
·      2nd session 3:30- 4:30 pm
Hughes Community Centre Wisdom Street, Hughes
$20 donation ($10 for students) requested plus $2 for afternoon tea payable at the door

31 Oct  6.00pm for drinks, 7.00pm speaker
Upstairs at the Astor Theatre

Corner of Beaufort St and Walcott St, Mt Lawley
Ticket only event: RSVP to by 27th October 2014

1 Nov.
·      1st meeting 4 – 5pm (GM crops) C3 Church, 94 Waratah Ave. Dalkeith.
·      2nd meeting 5:30 – 7pm (Climate), C3 Church, 94 Waratah Ave. Dalkeith
a $20 donation ($10 for students) is requested to cover costs - covers both sessions.

3 Nov.   TO BE ADVISED. 
Please register your interest in the Hobart event with Garth Paltridge (

Nov. 5th  7 for 7:30, Irish Club 175 Elizabeth St. a $20 donation at the door is requested to cover costs.

Nov. 6th 5 for 5:30, TheJ, 60 Noosa Dr, Noosa Heads
To book for this event, just click on:

Event enquiries should be directed to Paul Evans at:

Media enquiries should be directed to  Case Smit: .