The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), President Obama, and hisadministration think that alternative energy sources (like wind and solarpower) and biofuels in particular are the salvation from “climate change,”previously called “global warming.”

They view “carbon pollution” (a misnomer, as they actually mean carbondioxide, CO2) as the root cause of the current economic and environmentalmalaise in general. That’s why they blessed the nation with the “RenewableFuel Standard.”

I think the opposite is true; neither CO2 nor the “carbon footprint” is thecause of today’s many problems. In fact, the world today would be muchbetter off if that nonsense had never become a political football.

By Dr. Klaus L.E. Kaiser
Dr. Kaiser is author of CONVENIENT MYTHS, the green revolution –
perceptions, politics, and facts

Read More: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/print-friendly/64405

BACK in the 1980s anthropogenic global warming was resurrected. Its emphasis was that man-made CO2 would dangerously heat up the world and had to be controlled.

And there was lots of money available if this could be proved. So a multi-billion dollar industry was born.

The first thing was to speed up the rate of warming. This was done by ignoring a large number of temperature measuring stations from cold areas like Siberia, places with altitude such as Bolivia and only one above the Arctic Circle. So far so good.

Two distractions were the Medieval Warm Period, and the Little Ice Age. Michael Mann removed those with his hockey stick graph. It has since been shown that feeding random numbers into his program always resulted in a hockey stick. It rapidly went from the 1995 IPCC report’s cover and Al Gore’s presentations into obscurity.

There was also a problem with the record high temperatures from the 1930s–1940s. To lower them, the major measuring agencies started to adjust the original temperatures. This can be legitimate if weather stations have been moved or their surroundings compromised. A photographic record of every station in the US shows that 80% are no longer correctly positioned mostly due to urbanisation (green fields are now asphalt parking lots). Logically the old readings should have been regarded as valid and current readings would need to be lowered. They’ve done the opposite.

They started reducing the temperatures pre-1960 (give or take) and increasing them since then. NOAA for example was adjusting temperatures this way by 0.01 Fahrenheit per month, but then went to doing it twice a month. But hey, when you’re on a good thing, do it more often! The Australian, NZ and GB BOMs, and the US’s NOAA and NASA have all been doing this. They have also stopped providing historical data to other weather forecasters.

Parts of NOAA were so concerned with their official figures they established 100 green field stations across the US. After 10 years they show a steady drop, whereas the “official” adjusted figures just keep rising. Satellite measurements, which are difficult to fudge, are also showing a stable or dropping temperature pattern.

So what does this all mean? Our temperature records have been modified to meaningless; the computer models are useless (87 of 89 major models can’t get within two standard deviations of actuals); the actuals haven’t risen for 17 years; our governments do not class CO2 as a pollutant (look it up); environmentalists should embrace the benefits of more CO2; windmills and commercial solar should be junked.

Let’s get back to using coal and gas, which are more reliable, cheaper and are less dangerous (actually beneficial) to our environment.

We have experimented with square wheels and they have been a failure; we need to get back to ones that make the world go round.

John Ibbotson, Gulmarrad NSW
First published in The Daily Examiner 5 Sep 2014

In 2007 John wrote and published one of the first Australian books sceptical of AGW: Planning Ahead For Future Generations, by Highlighting Climate Change Myths.
www.lighthouses.com.au

John is still actively involved in slaying global warming myths and fighting for a better deal for Murray Darling irrigators.

Vale Ray Evans, Founder The Lavoisier Society

Ray Evans was one of the first Australians to recognise the poor science and dangerous goals of the global warmists. Way back in 2006, Ray wrote a well-reasoned booklet entitled “Nine Facts about Climate Change”. It still stands as a clear summary of the debate.

To read the full article see: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ray-evans-nine-facts.pdf [PDF, 1.6MB]

Dr. Don J. Easterbrook,
Western Washington University,
Bellingham, WA

May 19, 2014

A New York Times headline reads “Scientists Warn of Rising Oceans From Polar Melt” and goes on to say:

“A large section of the mighty West Antarctica ice sheet has begun falling apart and its continued melting now appears to be unstoppable, two groups of scientists reported on Monday. If the findings hold up, they suggest that the melting could destabilize neighbouring parts of the ice sheet and a rise in sea level of 10 feet or more may be unavoidable in coming centuries.”

The story, based on studies of the Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers in West Antarctica, went ballistic in the news media with dire predictions of the ‘unstoppable’ catastrophe about to unfold.

The authors of the Pine Island paper, Justin Gillis and Kenneth Chang say in their paper: “…we find no major bed obstacle that would prevent the glaciers from further retreat and draw down the entire basin.”

In a second paper, “Marine Ice Sheet Collapse Potentially Underway for the Thwaites Glacier Basin, West Antarctica,” the authors (Joughin, Smith, and Medley) also infer that the entire West Antarctic ice sheet will soon disappear, resulting in a sea level rise of up to 10 feet. The governor of California is now suggesting moving LAX and San Francisco airports!

WHAT’S HAPPENING NOW

Since last week’s press releases, thousands of Antarctic photos and text items on the internet have been relabeled, and you can scarcely find any mention of Antarctica now without reference to ‘the unstoppable, collapsing Antarctic ice sheet.’ From all of the media hype, you would think that the West Antarctic ice sheet is presently in the process of collapsing and drastic sea level rise is imminent. THE WEST ANTARCTIC ICE SHEET IS NOT COLLAPSING! The retreat of the Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers is NOT caused by global warming, and sea level is NOT going to rise 10 feet.

Read the full document: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/the-west-antarctic-ice-sheet-is-not-collapsing.pdf [PDF, 1.6MB]

The Climate Change Authority wants Australians to cut their production of carbon dioxide to 19% below 2000 levels by the year 2020.

The climate boffins should employ a demographer before they set such unrealistic goals.

The population of Australia in 2000 was about 19 million and it is now 23 million. By 2020 it will probably be over 25 million.

If Australia’s production of carbon dioxide was merely frozen at the 2000 level, that would require a 24% reduction per head of population by 2020.

If we add to that a real reduction in total emissions of 19% by 2020, emissions per capita would need to fall by 39% in just 6 years.

Even more unbelievable, China (supported by the UN/IPCC) thinks that developed countries “need to cut emissions by 40% from their 1990 levels by 2020”. This would require Australia’s per capita emissions to fall by 60% to just 40% of their 1990 levels. All achieved within the next six years.

Nothing real gets produced or done without generating carbon dioxide. Every working car, truck, tractor, dozer, quad bike, boat, helicopter, bulk carrier and aeroplane generates carbon dioxide. None of these will be powered by wind-mills, sunbeams or nuclear power in the next six years. How will they force us to use 39% less of them – carbon ration cards?

Making steel, bricks, cement, bitumen, minerals, metals, food, fertilisers and roads produces carbon dioxide – shall we each use just 61% of what we did in 2000?

Humans, cattle, sheep, pigs, barbeques, champagne and beer also emit carbon dioxide – shall we ration these too?

And Australian trains, lifts, supermarkets, operating theatres, refineries and power stations will not keep working 24/7 without base-load electricity from coal and gas, both generating carbon dioxide. Who is volunteering for living solely with Green Energy – brown-outs, blackouts or irregular “Earth Hours” for about four months of the year?

There is one way to achieve these goals – “The Tasmanian Solution”. Send 40% of our remaining industry to Asia, and convert Australia into a quiet green utopia of genteel poverty. This should create sufficient unemployment and reduced consumption to achieve the required emissions austerity.

Is the Climate Change Authority engineering an emissions target depression to achieve its savage cuts, or is this just another mindless model-driven target? We should demand to see their detailed plans for achieving these targets.

Carbon dioxide is hugely beneficial for all plant life, and its effect on global temperature is tiny and probably beneficial for most people. There is no evidence that carbon dioxide causes extreme weather. Man-made Climate Policy is a far greater and more certain danger than Man-made Climate Change.

Meanwhile, in the real world, the tide has turned in the war on carbon. Global warming stopped seventeen years ago; the carbon price collapsed a year ago; the EU is backpedalling on its disastrous green energy gamble; Russia, China, India, Japan, Canada, USA, Brazil and South Africa will not sign any binding Kyoto agreement; China has plans to build 160 new coal fired power stations in the next four years; and Tim Flannery has been sacked.

More, as well as:

• Modern Magic – Clean Energy by Wire
• There is “NO SIGNIFICANT GLOBAL WARMING”
• But if we had some Global Warming, things would be better – a bit of fun
• The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science –A new book by Dr Tim Ball
• But a Professor Wants Climate Change “Deniers” Thrown in Jail
• The Ship of Fools
• The Sixth Winter
• Finally, Let’s Axe the Carbon Tax

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/engineering-depression1.pdf [PDF, 82KB]

Keywords: Emissions targets, carbon energy, depression, population, coal mine fires, smog, pollution, John Coleman, science corruption, jail for deniers, axe the carbon tax, Antarctic ship of fools, sixth winter, global cooling.

Once again, the high priests of the UN/IPCC have forecast world starvation unless we mend our wicked ways.

According to them, unless we curb our use of oil, gas, coal and meat, the carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere will soar, the globe will heat up, and food production will plummet.

This is just a rerun of their previous failed forecasts based on academic theories and computer models.

They should have asked practical nurserymen, farmers and meteorologists.

Nurserymen would tell them that if you pump carbon dioxide into a greenhouse the plants grow faster, bigger, more drought-tolerant and more heat-tolerant. Therefore more carbon dioxide will produce more food.

More, as well as:

• Flood Plains are for Floods
• Dr Patrick Michaels’ lecture tour on Climate Change.
• No Global Warming for 17 years 8 months
• Believe it or Not

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/food-free-fridays.pdf [PDF, 161B]

Keywords: Forecasts of Doom, food, starvation, floods, flood plains, IPA, Patrick Michaels, global warming stops, baked beans cause flatulence and global warming.

Does carbon dioxide control global temperature. Not according to this graph (the correlation is negative for a considerable portion of the last 50 years):

[Click image for larger version.]

More information: http://www.climate4you.com/Text/Climate4you_August_2013.pdf

Climate Alarmists Rebuffed in Australian Election

The climate alarmists and carbon taxers have suffered a body blow in the recent Australian elections – it was a turning point in the war on carbon.

The victorious leader, Tony Abbott, had made it absolutely clear throughout the campaign and in the days immediately after his victory, that abolishing the carbon tax is one of his immediate priorities. Many factors played a part in his victory, but his outspoken and steadfast opposition to the carbon tax was an important one.

Thank you to our supporters for all the congratulatory comments about the role of “Carbon Sense” in preparing the way for this public revolt. Here are a couple:

Well Done Oz, well done Carbon Sense.
I congratulate Australia for chucking out those who were destroying your country, and congratulate you and “Carbon Sense” for the unyielding, persistent stream of useful scientific and logical argument against the climate lobby. Your message has been so powerful and so well presented for so long, surely it played a significant part in keeping the majority on the side of reason?
M.R.

I have followed your crusade and cheered for you. After all, your personal energy and determination must have had an important role in reminding your fellow Australians that the scare tactics and policies of climate change fanaticism are nothing more than a scheme of the political left. I am amazed by your lasting commitment to defend the professional and scientific truth about carbon, and challenge the claims and lies of demagogic politicians and opportunistic “scientists”. I must thank you for your efforts and would be honoured if we could maintain our professional link and friendship.
M.M.

And a General Comment:

Maybe you should change your name from “Carbon Sense” to simply “good sense”.
Even though I think you’re stark raving mad sometimes – other times I think you’re maybe the only sane one left! You remind me of Sisyphus at times!! Keep up the battle.
K.C.

There was good news and bad news in the election.

The good news was that the Labor/Green/Independent coalition that had led Australia into the unwinnable war on carbon was decisively rejected. The Labor vote fell to its lowest level for a century, the Green vote fell 3% and the independents who helped create and support this destructive green coalition are no longer in Parliament.

The other feature of this campaign was the high public interest in the election and the big dissatisfaction with all major parties. Lots of small single-issue parties were formed and contested the election. Most of these small parties were also opposed to the carbon tax.

And a few of them were smart enough to maintain strict discipline among themselves on how preference votes were directed, ensuring that some of them were elected to the Senate.

There was one bad note in the election. Two prominent new small parties, the Palmer United Party (PUP) and the Katter Australia Party (KAP) foolishly directed significant preferences to the ALP and/or Greens ahead of the Liberal/Nationals. This was done partly out of spite, but mainly in a big gamble that did not always pay off.

Bob Katter’s largely conservative supporters reacted badly to him “assisting the enemy” and his primary vote fell dramatically. His hold on his own electorate has become marginal. Clive Palmer’s pact with the Greens got less publicity before the election and he did surprisingly well all over Australia. He probably got one Senator elected because of his shady deal with the green devils, but then in another state a Green Senator will probably be elected on Palmer preferences. So we may be stuck for six years with at least one Green senator who should not have been elected.

Another feature of the election was the minimal support for the anti-coal-seam-gas party.

Now we need to make sure the new government dismantles the whole climate industry.

Stop Press: Germany’s conservatives also just won a massive victory in their latest election. Greens lost heavily, their vote falling from 16% in polls early in the year to 8% now (from 11% last election). More:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/merkel-wins-third-term-in-general-election-a-923755.html

More, as well as:

• How to Untangle the Climate Bureaucracy: Last In, First Out
• Abolish the Unreliable Energy Targets
• Arctic Ice Confounds Costly Computers
• Taxing Air
• We Have a New Consensus: 99% of Climate Models Overestimated Global warming
• The Last Word

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/carbon-quake.pdf [PDF, 101kB]

Keywords: Australian Election, Green vote falls, dismantling the climate bureaucracy, renewable energy targets, Arctic ice, taxing air, climate models fail.

Who Are You Going To Believe – The Government Climate Scientists Or The Data?
By Dr David M.W. Evans

We check the main predictions of the climate models against the best and latest data. Fortunately the climate models got all their major predictions wrong. Why? Every serious skeptical scientist has been consistently saying essentially the same thing for over 20 years, yet most people have never heard the message — here it is, put simply enough for any lay reader willing to pay attention.

Continue reading:

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/01/dr-david-evans-the-skeptics-case/

By Graham Williamson, April 2012

There is overwhelming evidence that the political climate change agenda has dragged many scientists down into the world of political spin and deception. In fact, the CSIRO have been seen to be complicit in continually repackaging, recycling, supporting and perpetuating the politicised corrupted and exaggerated claims of the discredited IPCC. Further, the CSIRO has continued to support these corrupted politicised IPCC claims even after the IPCC has been discredited by scientists from around the world, by the IAC review, and by the release of climategate emails. The CSIRO has shown no public concern about the unscientific practices of the IPCC or the implementation of reforms to strengthen the scientific procedures of the IPCC. The CSIRO has even been seen to be reinforcing the IPCC’s campaign to lower the standard of acceptable evidence by disguising AGW uncertainties to make them more acceptable.

The determination with which the CSIRO has endorsed the government’s call to “put a price on carbon” is also most disturbing since this advocacy is clearly not scientifically sustainable unless and until the science confirming human causation and reversibility is settled. But the CSIRO admit the science is not settled and natural climate variability cannot be reliably differentiated from human caused climatic changes. Although there is no clear scientific evidence of an imminent human caused climatic catastrophe and no scientific evidence that current mitigation techniques have the ability to control climate and sea level, CSIRO have nevertheless proceeded to endorse a “treatment” of unknown efficacy and cost for a problem which is yet to be proven real.

Full report:
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/the-decline-of-csiro.pdf [PDF, 999KB]