Dear Sir,

Here in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, I am truly dismayed by the unbridled hysterical approach to counter “Climate Change” (newspeak for ‘Global Warming’) taken by both of our Provincial and Federal Governments. Coal burning electricity generating stations have been shutdown to reduce CO2 emissions. Our new Liberal Party federal government has ratified The Paris Framework on Climate Change. Kingroot Apk Online

My biggest concern and fear comes from the declaration that carbon dioxide is a pollutant to be reduced as much as possible. Given that human beings exhale CO2, it does not take much imagination to conceive that the vast majority of human kind and our myriad activities will be put under some kind of Orwellian control.

Please send me your newsletter.192.168.0.1 I would like to be better informed about what is happening in our world from your groups perspective about ‘Climate Change caused by human life and activities’ nonsense. This is a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible but totally fallacious idea that somehow is being touted as truth.

Very Sincerely,
Daniel.

Every living thing needs access to energy – food, light and warmth.

But the UN is plotting to limit our access to energy.

This cartoon may be used freely providing the author’s name is retained and the source is acknowledged: www.carbon-sense.com

A study of human history shows what a grave threat this poses to all of us.

Our distant ancestors were hunter-gatherers. They killed and ate wild animals, which provided much of their energy needs. Solar energy warmed their days, and gave life to the herbs, roots and fruits they gathered and to the grasses and shrubs that sustained their prey. Sunlight reflected from the moon allowed them to hunt and fish during moon-lit nights. The sun and moon dominated their world, so naturally many of them worshipped these heavenly bodies.

The invention of stone and wooden weapons and tools increased their access to energy – hunting and gathering was more efficient with tools.

The discovery of how to control fire multiplied man’s access to energy. Fire provided heat and light and could be used to clear vegetation, fight enemies and trap wild animals.

Hunter-gatherers need access to land, preferably free from competitors. This led to the development of territory with defined and defended property boundaries. Property rights are thus an essential ingredient to provide guaranteed access to food and energy.
(more…)

This presentation by Michael Darby shows some of the frightening statements listed by the gurus of the Greens. Read, learn and then plan to defend Australia against seriously twisted people.

“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. 9apps fast download Even if the theory of global
warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and
environmental policy.”

Timothy Wirth, President of the United Nations Foundation, 1998-2013.

More Green agenda here: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/exposing-the-green-agenda.pdf [PDF, 747KB]

Read more: http://www.green-agenda.com/

Speech to the Senate
Carbon Farming Initiative Bill
2nd Reading

Parliament House, Canberra
31 October, 2014

Bob Day AO
Senator for South Australia

Thank you Mr President.

This year the world will enjoy its greatest grain crop on record. Let me say that again. This year the world will enjoy its greatest grain crop on record. After the world food security crisis of 2007 which saw civil unrest in some countries, it is fantastic to see that in just 7 years we are producing record amounts of food for a growing world population. The US Department of Agriculture recently raised global crop predictions for corn, soy and wheat. Yet the World Bank indicates that over the last 10 reporting years, the percentage of agricultural land worldwide has not changed.

So what is driving this world food production boom?

Mr President, plants are thriving on the extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. A recent study showed that climate modellers over-estimated the amount of carbon dioxide that would remain in the atmosphere. Lo and behold, they have now discovered that plants are soaking up the additional carbon dioxide and growing more vigorously. Plants and trees and crops will absorb 130 billion tonnes more carbon dioxide this century than expected. It’s called the ‘carbon dioxide fertilisation effect’. This is not just a benefit to food crops- it is a boon to native vegetation, from the ancient forests to desert scrub that environmental activists have been trying to preserve for decades. Then there is the latest science on how the oceans are absorbing carbon dioxide with plankton growing faster than previously thought.

So why is this Government spending billions of dollars to reduce this airborne saviour of vegetation and food crops?

I am stunned by the number of politicians who are either ignorant or wilfully misleading the public on this topic. A whole political industry has developed around new arcane language to describe what we have known for centuries about producing food and improving our environment. A whole false economy has developed, fuelled by taxpayer funding through an Emissions Reduction Fund, An Emissions Trading Scheme, Renewable Energy Targets, The Renewable Energy Agency, The Climate Change Authority, Climate Change Departments and more. This Bill seeks to subsidise activities because they have so-called ‘co-benefits’ – well, if there are benefits in activities that also arguably help the environment, people should be doing them anyway without massive taxpayer subsidies – just as landfill operators have been doing – and I commend them for doing so over the years – in capturing gas emissions from landfills, until the rent seeking, carpet-bagging, bootlegging crony capitalists jumped on the climate change bandwagon to suck money from the taxpayer.

With the carbon tax, families felt and could clearly see for the first time the direct impact on their personal budgets from spending money to reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. This Emissions Reduction Fund is no different, but by sleight of hand people will be less able to see how their taxes will need to stay higher than they should be in order to pay for this scheme.

Taking money from low-income families and spending it on dodgy activities with a spurious scientific basis punishes the poor, rewards the rent-seekers and churns money in taxes, grants and rebates.

Mr President, Australia can not afford this Emissions Reduction Fund during what the Government has told us is a budget emergency.

While many families struggle with the cost of living, while mums and dads struggle to find jobs to make ends meet, the Government spends their money appeasing high-income elites enthralled by this latest cause and championed by celebrities, self-promoting ‘experts’ and certain elements of the media.

Rent-seekers like wind tower companies and solar panel manufacturers get paid handsomely and advocates in the climate change industry are living very nicely off the system flying around in private jets irrespective of whether these schemes improve the environment or human living conditions.

$2.5bn of taxpayers money spent on reducing carbon dioxide to stop so-called global warming while Arctic and Antarctic sea ice is growing. Growing, not shrinking. It’s bizarre!

I am dismayed that honest, intelligent people in this place can sit mute and watch this blatant trashing of both science and economics.

Mr President, I have a science background but any high school student can tell you that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. CO2 in the atmosphere is not pollution!

Now I know there are colleagues in this chamber who agree with me on all this but feel they must toe a party line but I for one am not so constrained and perhaps I speak for them also in saying that I will not sit mute and support this nonsense.

Minister Cormann told this place just two days ago, and I quote:

“Coal is good. Coal is good. It is at the heart of our economic prosperity here in Australia and around the world. It has helped lift living standards for people right across the world. It will continue to help lift living standards around the world.”

If that is so, if colleagues believe in all good conscience that this Bill is wrong, then I urge them to speak up – don’t be scientific girly men!

I oppose the Bill.

By Paul Driessen

“… But surely the most surreal episode of the march was Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. saying Morano and I and thousands like us should be jailed for expressing doubts about “dangerous manmade climate change.”

“I think they should be in jail … with all the other war criminals.” Republican politicians too – “those guys are doing the Koch brothers bidding and are against all the evidence, saying global warming does not exist. They are contemptible human beings,” he fumed.

“So RFK the younger wants to punish us for the “crimes” of exercising our First Amendment rights, demanding actual evidence to support alarmist assertions, saying people’s needs for reliable, affordable energy must be part of the conversation – and insisting that those needs take precedence over absurd claims that climate change is “the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction,” posing “greater long-term consequences” than ISIL, terrorism or Ebola, as Secretary of State John Kerry insists.”

See the full article by Paul Driessen:

http://townhall.com/columnists/pauldriessen/2014/10/04/rfk-jr-wants-me-jailed–as-a-war-criminal-n1900518/page/full

“Global climate changes have been far more intense (12 to 20 times as intense in some cases) than the global warming of the past century, and they took place in as little as 20–100 years. Global warming of the past century (0.8° C) is virtually insignificant when compared to the magnitude of at least 10 global climate changes in the past 15,000 years. None of these sudden global climate changes could possibly have been caused by human CO2 input to the atmosphere because they all took place long before anthropogenic CO2 emissions began. The cause of the ten earlier ‘natural’ climate changes was most likely the same as the cause of global warming from 1977 to 1998.”

Professor Don Easterbrook

Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783

Ref: Alley, R.B 2000 The Younger Dryas cold interval as viewed from central Greenland. Quaternary Science Reviews 19: pp 213-226.

This quote from the great H.L. Mencken captures perfectly the religious nature of those in the climate cult:

“The essence of science is that it is always willing to abandon a given idea, however fundamental it may seem to be, for a better one; the essence of theology is that it holds its truths to be eternal and immutable.”

By Carl Brehmer

“Evidence of widespread control of fire dates to approximately 125,000 years.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_of_fire_by_early_humans

Many people assert that environmental extremists want to take civilization back to a pre-industrial state some 150-200 years ago, but the achievement of a “carbon free economy” would take humanity back at least 125,000 years before the discovery and control of fire, because that is the source of the carbon dioxide emissions that have now been declared “pollution.” Even as the somewhat obscure term “cap-and-trade” is a little more clear when called a “carbon tax”, even more clarity would be achieved by calling it a tax on the use of fire, because that is what it is. In their role as fuels, all hydrocarbons are useless until they are burned, which produces the energy that has fuelled human progress and provided the following benefits, which even the environmental extremists and various “rent takers” take for granted:

1) Light; even kerosene lanterns burn fossil fuel and produce carbon dioxide.

2) Heat; ask the victims of hurricane Sandy or anybody who experiences a power outage about the value of heat. Even primitive people use fire for heat.

3) Communication; all modern forms of communication depend upon the power provided by the energy derived from fire.

4) Rapid travel; what form of travel today isn’t powered by the use of fire? Trains, planes and automobiles are all powered with fire.

5) Escape from countless hours of physical labour. Prior to the discovery and use of fire, especially that used to produce electricity, disparate groups of human being were stuck in separate small communities around the world forced to spend most of their time in physical labour.

6) Inventions such as the modern computer and the rapid, worldwide communication network, which includes cell phones, e-mail and the internet would not have been developed nor could they be sustained by the intermittent, low density energy derived from solar cells and wind mills.

7) Satellites, both communication and weather; how many satellites have been launched into space without the use of fire? Many, but not all, are sent to space by hydrocarbon fuels. (Even those satellites that study outgoing long wave radiation and have futilely been attempting to prove that increasing levels of carbon dioxide are causing catastrophic climate change.)

8) One of the consequences of using fire as an energy source is that it has provided many people with enough time on their hands to debate whether or not fire is a good thing, i.e., the global warming AKA climate change AKA biodiversity AKA sustainable development debate.

(Remember also that environmental extremists not only want to ban the use of fire for energy production; they want to ban the use of nuclear energy and hydroelectric energy as well.)

The vast amount of energy that the use of fire has placed at the disposal of humanity has been used to revolutionize the nature of our existence. The mere fact that fire was a source of light and heat independent of the sun meant that humans could roam beyond the tropics into the damp, cold regions of the north with seasons of snow and long freezing nights. It was fire and fire alone that enabled man to become a creature native to the entire world and not just the tropics. In addition, the heat of the fire, i.e. cooking, brought about changes in our food supply that made otherwise inedible food palatable and nourishing. Fire has not only increased the variety of food that humans can eat, it also powers the diesel tractors used in modern farming. Our food supply has consequently multiplied beyond the wildest dreams of our ancient ancestors. Current world hunger problems are primarily distribution problems not quantity problems.

Nor has the importance of fire diminished with time; rather the reverse. Wood was no doubt the first fuel used in building and maintaining a fire, but coal took primacy over wood in the 17th century. In the 20th century these two fuels were join by gasoline and oil. In the 21st century shale oil and natural gas are gaining importance.

If the “powers that be” really thought that the continued use of fire was causing a climate catastrophe they would ban its use all together, but it would seem that they just want a piece of the action. The cap-and-trade scheme is not unlike property tax in which the government just lays claim to your property and starts charging you rent, i.e. property tax. (If you think that you own your home just stop paying your property tax and see what happens.) The cap-and-trade scheme is the government just laying claim on all fossil fuel resource within its jurisdiction and charging people a fee to burn them as an energy source.

“The power to tax is the power to destroy.” (John Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland 17 U.S. 327)

It could be that humans will eventually run out of things to burn, but that day keeps getting pushed back by innovation. For the present I can’t think of a more efficient way to destroy our society’s prosperity, which has brought us all of the above benefits, than to impose a tax on the use of fire. It leaves me wondering; in what kind of society do we now live in which we have to buy a license to use fire as an energy source, something that has been free for 125,000 years? And who exactly are we paying these fees to in order to obtain the privilege of burning that which nature provides?

Carl Brehmer

(Slightly edited from the original.)

“Germany and the European Union have taken a pioneering role on climate protection, under the mistaken assumption that other countries would follow our example. That’s the wrong strategy. Making this kind of advanced effort weakens our bargaining position. Instead of building wind turbines, we should build higher dikes.”

– German government advisor Kai Konrad

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/interview-with-kai-konrad-on-the-mistakes-of-european-climate-policy-a-870693.html

By Steve Goreham

I’m announcing a new on-line quote list resource for journalists, writers, and authors on climate change, global warming, energy, and the environment. You can find the list here.

The list contains more than 450 quotes and 20,000 words from political leaders, scientists, environmentalists, and news media headlines. It currently includes more than 30 quotes by or about the IPCC, more than 30 quotes by recent political leaders, and more than 60 quotes on energy. The compilation of quotes is a collection from my two books on climate change, but will grow to include additional quotes in the future.

Citations from books, technical articles, news media, and web sites are provided. I’ve stated the original source of the quote wherever possible.

To help user search efforts, the quote list is divided into the following categories:

• Atmospheric CO2, Greenhouse Effect
• Carbon Taxes, Business
• Climate Change, General
• Climategate
• Energy, Biofuels
• Energy, Hydrocarbons
• Energy, Wind and Solar
• Energy, Other
• Environment, Pollution
• Gore, Al
• Hansen, James
• Health Effects
• Icecaps, Sea Level
• IPCC
• Media
• Models
• Ocean Acidification
• Overpopulation
• Polar Bears and Extinction
• Political Leaders
• “Remedies”
• Science Settled & Deniers
• Science Organizations & Funding
• Solar Effects
• Temperature
• United Nations
• Weather, Droughts & Floods
• Miscellaneous Great Quotes

Please take advantage of the resource. Please also let me know of any needed corrections.

Steve Goreham is Executive Director of the Climate Science Coalition of America and author of the new book The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania.