Here is an animated video produced by FirstEnergy available from Mining Connection (http://www.miningconnection.com/). It shows how we make electricity from coal. It also shows that the cooling towers so loved by TV to illustrate power plant pollution in fact emit only warm air and moisture – not even the demonised but harmless carbon dioxide. The invisible carbon dioxide exits via the less photogenic chimneys. So what TV usually shows to illustrate “carbon pollution” is no more polluting than what comes out of the spout of your kettle. So much for truth on TV.

By John Bignell

Source: http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/religion.htm

It was Michael Crichton who first prominently identified environmentalism as a religion. That was in a speech in 2003, but the world has moved on apace since then and adherents of the creed now have a firm grip on the world at large.

Global Warming has become the core belief in a new eco-theology. The term is used as shorthand for anthropogenic (or man made) global warming. It is closely related to other modern belief systems, such as political correctness, chemophobia and various other forms of scaremongering, but it represents the vanguard in the assault on scientific man.

The activists now prefer to call it “climate change”. This gives them two advantages:

1. It allows them to seize as “evidence” the inevitable occurrences of unusually cold weather as well as warm ones.
2. The climate is always changing, so they must be right.

Full report as PDF: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/global-warming-religion.pdf [59 KB]

Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, Earth and its inhabitants have benefited from the rise in airborne CO2 by an average growth increase of about 12% for plants and 18% for trees. This has improved Earth’s habitats and ecosystems, including increasing food production for an undernourished population. These benefits have helped offset the many negative impacts upon nature caused by other human activities.

These are some of the many benefits of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere:

1. Additional CO2 causes an astonishing increase in plant growth.
2. More CO2 causes plants to need less water to produce the same amount of growth.
3. Certain health-promoting substances such as vitamin C and antioxidants, are increased with additional airborne CO2.
4. With much more food production per acre, Earth should be able to feed an expanding population and save habitats and ecosystems.
5. Existing habitats and ecosystems will have higher plant and wildlife capacity.
6. The greening of Earth will continue and extend into the deserts as plants become drought tolerant.
7. Plants can better resist various stresses when grown in a CO2 enriched atmosphere.
8. Dramatic increases in the growth of Earth’s forests will help them recover from recurring natural disasters and aid a renewable resource industry.
9. CO2 is Earth’s greatest airborne fertilizer.
10. CO2 is the staff of life for Earth’s plant kingdom which is the beginning of the food chain; without it there would be no life on Earth.

Source: http://www.plantsneedco2.org/default.aspx?menuitemid=401

For more information on the beneficial effects caused by carbon dioxide in the atmosphere see:
http://www.plantsneedco2.org/default.aspx/MenuItemID/103/MenuGroup/AboutUs/CO2IsGreenAndGood.htm

PDF version: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/co2-good-green.pdf [PDF, 35 KB]

It is often said that there is “consensus” among scientists regarding anthropogenic global warming. This report lists 700 scientists who dissent from that view.

Download the report (updated March 2009): http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/us-senate-minority-report.pdf [PDF, 1.4 MB]

Source: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.WelcomeMessage

Howard C. Hayden, Professor Emeritus of Physics, UConn, has written a submission to the US EPA.

His conclusion:

“To put it fairly but bluntly, the global-warming alarmists have relied on a pathetic version of science in which computer models take precedence over data, and numerical averages of computer outputs are believed to be able to predict the future climate.

“It would be a travesty if the EPA were to countenance such nonsense.”

Read the submission: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/hayden-submission-epa.pdf [PDF, 65 KB]

By Sandy McClintock & Rick Dean

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has presented data for Echuca Aerodrome that shows no change in temperature for 100 years. However the widely promoted Australian “high-quality climate data set” shows an apparent increase in temperature of 1.2 degree centigrade per century for exactly the same location. How can this be explained?

http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/echuca-temperature.pdf [PDF, 97 KB]

A statement by Viv Forbes, Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition.

27 March 2010

The Carbon Sense Coalition today said that Earth Hour should be renamed “Blackout Night” and be held outdoors, for the whole night, in mid-winter, on the shortest and coldest day of the year – 22 June in the Southern Hemisphere.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that all supporters of alternative energy should spend just one night in the cold and the dark, emitting no carbon dioxide from coal, oil, gas, petrol or diesel for lights, TV, hot coffee, barbecues or cars. This will be good practice for the blackouts and shortages to come if Penny Wong’s rationing of carbon products and carbon energy is attempted.

“Winter nights are usually still and cold, so the candles crew can experience what it was like depending on alternate energy in the recent snowstorms in the Northern Hemisphere when wind turbines froze and solar panels were covered in snow. The back-to-nature brigade can also try living without iron roofs and concrete walls, both of which require coal and emit carbon dioxide during their production.

“To hold a candles-and-champagne party indoors, on the mildest night of the year, for just one hour, shows that the whole thing is green tokenism. Moreover both candles and champagne emit carbon dioxide. Let the true believers try the real thing in one of the extreme seasons so they can appreciate the great benefits we take for granted when using all of our carbon fuels and foods.

“Instead of sneering at human achievements they should salute the people who keep the lights on for the other 364 days of the year.

“Our salute will be to turn on every light on our property, and we urge all supporters to do the same.

“Australia gets almost 90% of its electricity from hydrocarbon fuels – black coal, brown coal, gas and oil. If the German Greens close their coal and nuclear power they can fall back on gas from Russia, nuclear power from France or hydro from Scandinavia when the lights go out.

“Australia has no prudent neighbours to bludge on if we gamble our future electricity needs on sunbeams, sea breezes and ceiling insulation. If we attempt the massive cuts in carbon dioxide emissions demanded by the deep greens we will see Australia headed for the Romanian power rationing experience – during the Ceaucescu regime in Romania, each house was limited to ONE 25 watt bulb for all of their light.

“All over the world we have aging power stations and an orchestrated campaign by a few warm and well-fed agitators to harass, delay and deter construction of new power facilities.

“Such a campaign can only have one result – many ‘Earth Night’ blackouts are assured.

“So we support ‘Blackout Night’ to prepare our population for the dark days ahead.

“Take a look at a place that celebrates ‘Earth Hour’ every night – Stalinist North Korea. Compare it to free South Korea that keeps its people warm, well fed and working (with the help of Australian coal):

PDF version: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/earth-hour-2010.pdf [PDF, 102KB]

“The idea that raising the cost of energy will induce the emergence of new technologies could only be proposed by people completely ignorant of economic history and the history of technology. I cannot think of a single instance of this happening. Taken to its logical conclusion we can argue that the Romans would have developed the steam engine — if not the car — if only the emperors had have had the foresight to put a heavy tax on horses and bullocks…

“And if taxes are all that is needed to bring about technological progress why haven’t heavy petrol taxes in Europe led to new transport technologies?”

Gerard Jackson, Economics Editor Brookes News
http://brookesnews.com/100103alternativenergy.html

The Australian Government is spending at least $800 million per year on research related to Climate Change. The cash is being sprayed across the country so that no university or research centre is missing out. More than 5,000 researchers are beneficiaries of government climate largess, but still they cannot forecast the weather more than a few days ahead.

Where does the money go? No one appears to know, so Carbon Sense asked Bob Greenelsh to see what he could dig up, and Bob has presented his preliminary findings.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is the big winner with government expenditure running at the rate of $400 million a year. After adding funds from the Coal Industry, the total for CCS is probably closer to $800 million a year. Other researchers are getting cash for projects on alternative energy, climate modelling, disaster predicting and research into the impact of climate change on subjects of interest to the researchers. For example, there is an intriguing $760,000 grant for research into the impact of climate change on native orchids.

With so much money being spent by so many, involving so many different organisations and on a vast variety of projects the obvious question is, does anyone really know what is going on? Is the cash being properly spent and will there be a proper reckoning of results and benefits? A second question is, do all the researchers believe that man-made CO2 is causing global warming and that such warming is going to cause other disasters? It is a good bet that their main focus is on getting cash for their project and knowing that there is global warming stimulus package they include “global warming” in the project application.

With those magic words the money will soon be on its way and they can do their stuff and forget about global warming.

See the initial report by Bob Greenelsh: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/research-spending-greenelsh.pdf [PDF, 35KB]

In his Two Dead Elephants in Parliament, Malcolm Roberts writes:

The UN IPCC ’s global warming alarm is dead. Killed by the stampeding revelations of the UN IPCC fraud and falsities.

Yet, there are two dead elephants in federal parliament—one each in the Senate and the House of Representatives. In each chamber, politicians are tiptoeing around the UN IPCC corpse. They’re pretending climate alarm is still alive—no one wants to be the first to break the news.

Kevin Rudd’s mob, cowed in silence imposed by party control and paralysed by fear of voter backlash, pretend the rotting corpses are not there. They aim to suffocate Australia through an Emissions Trading Scheme imposing a huge tax payable by every consumer.

Tony Abbott’s mob is paralysed by fear of sensational headlines labelling them anti-green. They too tiptoe warily around the putrid corpses. They think that to be seen as environmentally caring they need a plan for tackling global warming alarm. They’re trying to prove their plan is better. So they push a far less costly, far less risky and far less damaging alternative to suffocating Australia—they want to choke Australia through yet more unneeded regulation.

The growing majority of Aussies watch and laugh. Woken to reality, they look on and shake their heads with derision and disbelief. While politicians tiptoe around dead elephants, Aussies have figured out what really matters—global warming alarm has been fabricated.

Most Australians genuinely care for the environment. They’ve concluded climate alarm is a wasteful, costly derailment— a derailment that prevents addressing real environmental challenges.

Read the full document: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/dead-elephants.pdf [PDF, 415 KB]