Will Anderson, Professor Emeritus, University of Pretoria has written an “Urgent Submission to the SAICE [South African Institution of Civil Engineering] Council on the Likelihood of Severe Water Resource Droughts” with this summary:

1. There is overwhelming evidence of a causal and predictable linkage between variations in solar
activity and climatic responses, specifically rainfall and river flow.
2. There is no evidence of trends in rainfall and river flow data that could be attributed to unnatural
climate change.
3. There is increasing worldwide research that questions the fundamental basis of climate change
theory.
4. The international political situation regarding the implementation of universal measures to
restrict greenhouse gas emissions has collapsed.
5. Recommendations that South Africa should resort to the development of measures to adapt to
human caused climate change will fail because they would be adapting to something that does
not exist.

Read the complete document: www.carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/alexander-2008.pdf [PDF, 266KB].

Extract…
… Al Gore, the IPCC, and the vast majority of politicians in
the US and Europe argue that this [need to reduce CO2 emissions] is all established science. But I
am here to show that not only is this not established science, but that
the objective evidence available indicates that it is false.

Shocking isn’t it? You might ask, how can a lifelong Democrat
like myself reject my party’s position on global warming and join the
camp of the skeptics, virtually all of whom are Republicans or neocons.
Read the full article: www.carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/hertzberg.pdf[PDF, 655KB]

The Carbon Sense Coalition recommends that all policies on global warming should be based on the science and the evidence, not on unproven computer forecasts or media scare stories. We also submit that markets and private initiatives will achieve better, quicker and cheaper results than government departments, legislative coercion, targeted subsidies, or punitive taxation. Here is the full submission: www.carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/wilkins.pdf

Earth Hour is a sacred rite of the global warming religion whose message is: confess, do penance (turn out the lights for an hour once a year), and your sins will be forgiven.
(more…)

My good mate, Colin, was in a shopping plaza recently, and there was a Qantas stall offering free ‘environmentally friendly’ light bulbs. This is apparently part of their carbon offset program for which they charge extra to those passengers who believe this stuff to ‘save the planet’ when they fly. This ‘carbon neutral’ surcharge is voluntary.

Now the light bulbs were not only offered free, but these would be installed free.

So Colin signed up, and the light bulbs were duly delivered and installed.

The installation team also took away all of the offending old light bulbs.

After the first night of walking around in semi-darkness, Colin is now buying proper bulbs and replacing the free ones which were supplied and installed by Qantas.

I wonder if Qantas shareholders approve of this quaint activity?

John McRobert
Brisbane

The essential ingredient for all growing plants is CO2 in the atmosphere. But organic matter in the soil is also of value for the plant life on which we all depend. It can only be put into the soil by growing plants (including fungi) and the bacteria, worms and other microbes that live on and beside the plants. All plant and soil carbon comes, in the end, from CO2 in the atmosphere.
(more…)

Question:
I think that companies that are making millions of dollars should be forced to use renewable energy, and/or invest in it; they should be doing their bit for the planet. The government should not be forcing householders to pay a tax or more for living, food, electricity etc., especially when they can’t stop what big business does to the environment, or what the government spends the carbon money on.

You can’t be serious that the burning of fossil fuels doesn’t hurt the environment; even if you don’t believe in climate change, this would be one point that I don’t agree with. Also I don’t agree that the planet needs more emissions to be able to grow food, as plants were growing on this planet long before companies started burning fossil fuels to fuel factories.
(more…)

By Muriel Newman

“The climate change debate is forever shifting as science casts long shadows of doubt on the predictions of global catastrophe. The debate gathered a world-wide audience when climate alarmists gained control of the climate science agenda. Its popularisation has given it a political momentum that is proving difficult to halt.”

Read the full article as a PDF [31KB]. The original source is from The New Zealand Centre for Political Research: www.nzcpr.com/weekly124.htm.