climaterealists's blog

"The End of an Era?"

By Viv Forbes (

23 May 2011

A personal explanation first:

People seldom recognise major turning points when they occur. At the time they are just another routine event in a crowd of trivial news.

But I was shocked recently by what I believe is a major turning point in Australian industrial history.

Xstrata announced that smelting and refining of Mount Isa copper is to be phased out.

As a young graduate, decades ago, I watched in wonder as men in asbestos suits tapped the glowing copper furnace to release a test sample of molten metal for the metallurgist. I gazed at the huge ladles pouring the molten copper into the casting wheel to form the slabs of blister copper. I saw the heaps of the red metal piled up on the rail siding destined for Townsville. And, as I later walked through the refinery at Townsville, I marvelled at the science, engineering and practical skills under that roof. To see the continuous casting wheel turning molten metal into rod and wire was modern magic.

Methane: myths & misrepresentations

by Barry Brill

May 18, 2011

The New Zealand Government is the first to legislate financial penalties on natural gas (methane or CH4) emanating from ruminant animals.

The claimed justification is that the ETS levy is an “insurance policy” against the possibility that methane might contribute to a future of dangerous global warming, as the IPCC has theorized.

But, as with any insurance, it should not be taken out unless the premium is reasonably commensurate with the risk being hedged. The obvious problem is that nobody can quantify the value at risk, or the cost of the premium, or the the scope of the coverage, or the likelihood of the event. This article deals only with the last of these.

The IPCC believes dangerous global warming might occur if the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases, expressed in carbon-dioxide-equivalents (CO2e), were to exceed 450 parts per million. CO2 volumes are currently about 390ppm.


Why are we paying a carbon tax?

By Donald Offwood

16 June 2011

In terms of the science of climate change, I am a layman, but the questions are simple, so a layman should find easy answers. The IPCC has had many learned scholars gather and present their conclusions as to the involvement of human generated CO2 in the science of climate change and many other learned scholars have held opposing views. Indeed, in August 2009 Dr Vincent Gray of the UN IPCC Expert Reviewers Panel said, ‘There are no plausible arguments currently available which support the view that human greenhouse emissions are having a detectable influence on the climate.’


CO2 is a trace element, about 0.038% of our air, which is essential to the production of all vegetation and food; without it all plants would disappear and we would die very quickly. CO2 is not a problem nor a pollutant; it is an essential gas to our survival. A good argument can be made for increasing CO2 to encourage crop and food production.

Letter from R.C.E. Wyndham to The NZ Listener

14 May 2011

Dear Ms. Stirling

I am a visitor to New Zealand, and only yesterday had sight of your 14 May edition of the New Zealand Listerner with its entertainingly fanciful lead story, accompanied by appropriately lurid graphics.

Since this is a topic which raises much controversy, let me try and see if I can encapsulate in a few lines what it is that you would wish you readers to believe. You propose, it would seem, that marginal increases in the concentrations of what is no more than a trace gas, amounting in total not to 10% of the earth's atmosphere, not even to 5% - nay, not even to 1%. can bring about cataclysmic changes in global climate.

HANSEN NZ VISIT - Climate Fraud from NASA

14 May 2011
James Hansen was one of the 'scientists' involved in what has become known as Climategate - where data was altered and methods were arrogantly concealed from other scientists and from the public. 
Now other NASA 'scientists' are being outed.
Hansen is in NZ now and condemning the NZ government in the popular media. His visit was paid for by a phalanx of left wing, anti development, control freak 'academics' led by former Green party leader Jeanette Fitzsimons - who heats her home with a carbon belching wood stove.

NASA researchers admit adding fake inches to sea level rises. Skeptics denounce desperate attempt to salvage government global warming policies.


In a disturbing development in the ongoing global warming fiasco the U.S. government funded Sea Level Research Group has been given a green light from NASA to exaggerate sea level rises way above actual recorded measurements.The reason? So that policy makers can falsely blame humans for adding to natural rises in sea levels.


Land Mass Rise Used as Excuse to Fiddle Data

Carbon — demonized by climate propaganda 

Joanne Nova

The PR machine has spent twenty years pretending to be scientific while they push poll the phrase “carbon is pollution”  (Don’t you want to stop pollution?) But turn the polling inside out and the nonsense is exposed. Stephen Harper takes the PR team’s theme to its logical conclusion and uses it against them.


Forget plate tectonics and continental drift. A trace gas in the atmosphere can reshape the Earth, at least, that’s apparently how many people see it. A new survey shows that over a third of the population think that climate change induces not just tsunamis, but even volcanic eruptions. Worse, 37% of people are so convinced carbon is pollution that they think it would be a worthwhile aim to reduce the carbon content of their body. (The ultimate diet, you might say).


The Global Warming Doctrine is Not a Science: Notes for Cambridge 

Václav Klaus, “The Science and Economics of Climate Change Conference”, Howard Theatre at Downing College, University  of  Cambridge,

10 May 2011

World's Oldest Temperature Record: No Significant Warming Since 1995, Cooling Instead

The Central England Temperature (CET) database is the world's oldest instrumental temperature record. Its temperature data has been used in hundreds of peer-reviewed studies because of its uniqueness and accuracy. It also has the advantage of never being manipulated.


Dr James Hansen- letter from Ken

Dr James Hansen (NASA)
Somewhere in New Zealand
Hello Again James
You will remember me, I have written you numerous times over the last three years, suggesting you resign your post at NASA. I have written to the President asking that you be fired for insubordination - as you know.
So now you are planning to launch litigation in various countries, are you?  (attached) The worm has turned, the planet is cooling, and Global Warming/Climate Change has dropped down to the bottom of the pile of the average voter/taxpayer 's concerns.
Well that is just not good enough, is it James - people are no longer feeling the hysteria you promoted so well, parading yourself across the front page of the NY Times for 25 years. Must be a bummer James, after your rock star status, and all that. Must be especially hard, since your 'science' had descended into a religeous ferver, to see your desciples wandering off. I can see why a true believer such as yourself, would try using the court system to enforce your beliefs on an unwilling populace.

Shale Gas Shock Challenges Climate and Energy Policies 

London, 4 May - The Global Warming Policy Foundation today publishes a detailed report about the shale gas revolution and its likely implications for UK and international climate policy.

The report The Shale Gas Shock, written by Matt Ridley and with a foreword by Professor Freeman Dyson, finds that shale gas:

  • is not only abundant but relatively cheap and therefore promises to take market share from nuclear, coal and renewable energy and to replace oil in some transport and industrial uses, over coming decades.
  • will help to keep the price of nitrogen fertiliser low and hence keep food prices down, other things being equal.
  • is unlikely to be a major source of pollution or methane emissions, but in contrast promises to reduce pollution and accelerate the decarbonisation of the world economy.

Matt Ridley, the author of the GWPF report, said:

"Abundant and relatively cheap shale gas promises to lower the cost of gas relative to oil, coal and renewables. It indefinitely postpones the exhaustion of fossil fuels and makes reducing emissions of carbon dioxide possible without raising energy prices."



Subscribe to RSS - climaterealists's blog