Submitted by climaterealists on Thu, 08/04/2010 - 20:30
TBR.cc
Investigate magazine's breaking news forum -by Ian Wishart 8 April 2010
The Royal Society of New Zealand has again nailed its sorry little tail to the mast of a sinking global warming ship, with a statement designed to convince news media, politicians and the public that the science behind climate change is sound.
The latest paper comes in the wake of embarrassing errors discovered in the UN's AR4 report, and of course the Climategate disaster which revealed scientists conspiring to prevent studies they disagreed with from being published.
What makes the latest RSNZ paper embarrassing are some basic errors and cobbled together assumptions. Let's take a look at a couple.
Submitted by climaterealists on Thu, 08/04/2010 - 20:25
Good afternoon Mr Goodfellow
On 23 November 2009 we wrote to you with our concerns with the direction of the National Party is taking, even though we are not financial members.
We did not receive even an acknowledgement from you which is surprising although this is becoming par for the course with National Party members. Over the months we have corresponded with a variety of MPs, admittedly mainly on the subject of climate change, and rarely receive an acknowledgement let alone a reply. We are becoming more and more disillusioned with our Prime Minister who is in grave danger of following the track of the unpopular former PM who put her ambitions for herself before ambitions for her country and its people.
Submitted by climaterealists on Thu, 08/04/2010 - 20:22
Dear Prime Minister
You are so slow to wake up!! Today you are quoted in the NZ Herald as saying “Despite concerns from businesses the [ETS] introduction was likely to go ahead in July”.
At least you have the word ‘likely’ in there, suggesting there is still hope your senses may return before it is too late!!
I questioned you at a meeting in Gisborne in July 2009 about the ETS, and was assured you would not harm the economy. You answer was much too smooth and slick to convince me of anything other than the fact that you were not someone I would trust. Events have done nothing to make me reassess that view.
You rushed your ETS amendments through under urgency so you could brag at Copenhagen even though we knew Copenhagen would produce nothing and that no one else would have an ETS as far reaching as ours, thus violating your election promise we would not be a world leader.
Submitted by climaterealists on Wed, 07/04/2010 - 16:48
Good Afternoon, Mr Prime Minister,
Submitted by climaterealists on Wed, 07/04/2010 - 16:45
Dear Editor,
NIWA's Principle Climate Scientist Brett Mullan claims that all the IPCC's computer models agree on a large number of basic aspects of climate change. (20 March "letters").
The facts are as follows. There has always been an enormous variation of predictions about the earth's rising temperature, from these models. The IPCC has tended to use averages, and provide a range of possible scenarios. Over the 20 years so far that these models have been operating, even the "lowest" prediction has been too high, and the other models predictions have ranged upwards from there.
And they assure us that what they are telling us now about climate 100 years hence, will be right? It is now far too late for the IPCC's media cheerleaders to preserve any of their own credibility, let alone protect that of the IPCC. It is also time for NIWA and other scientific organisations to get their houses in order, considering the inevitable repercussions once proper commissions of inquiry have been held.
Submitted by climaterealists on Wed, 07/04/2010 - 16:27
Foxnews.com
8 February 2010
NEW YORK — Before the United Nations can save the planet, it needs to clean up its own house. And as scandal after scandal has unfolded over the past decade, from Oil for Food to procurement fraud to peacekeeper rape, the size of that job has become stunningly clear.
But any understanding of the real efforts that job entails should begin with a look at the long and murky career of Maurice Strong, the man who may have had the most to do with what the U.N. has become today, and still sparks controversy even after he claims to have cut his ties to the world organization.
From Oil for Food to the latest scandals involving U.N. funding in North Korea, Maurice Strong appears as a shadowy and often critically important figure.
Submitted by climaterealists on Wed, 07/04/2010 - 16:23
An Open Letter from Scientists in the United States on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Errors Contained in the Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007
[Note: Over 250 scientists have already signed this open letter and signatures are still being collected. For a full list of signers please
visit this page. On March 13, 2010, the letter was sent to federal agencies. The vast majority of the signers are climate change scientists who work at leading U.S. universities and institutions. They include both IPCC and non-IPCC authors. Additional signers include professionals from related disciplines, including physical, biological and social scientists. If you are a scientist wishing to sign the letter, please fill out the form on the this page. If you have any questions, please contact the letter's authors, contact information is below.]
Submitted by climaterealists on Wed, 07/04/2010 - 16:01
Dr Nick Smith
Minister of Environment and Climate Change issues
Hello Dr Smith
This data is from the prominent NZ Climate scientist who was refused entry to your meeting with Rodney Hide. (by whom?)
The Key government needs to do better than that - much better - the people expect due dilligence on the science and will start demanding it.
Any effort to prevent a robust debate on the science and economics will result in a loss of public support for National.
Regards,
Ken S
Submitted by climaterealists on Wed, 07/04/2010 - 15:54
National has a goal to lift the productivity of NZ. Putting the ETS into place will work against this goal.
Comments made by John Key & Tim Grosser suggest that the main reason for our continued pursuit of an ETS is so that NZ does not become isolated from its trading partners.
This is weak. An ETS should be considered based on good scientific data. If this is not available, then an ETS should not be considered.
I voted for National at the last election because I was of the opinion that National was staffed by thinking people. National had stood against the ETS.
If the ETS is implemented, I and many others WILL NEVER VOTE FOR NATIONAL AGAIN.
Submitted by climaterealists on Wed, 07/04/2010 - 15:33
Telegraph.co.uk 3 April 2010
The Commons committee seemed unable even to understand the evidence, says Christopher Booker
To anyone who watched or read the hearings of the Commons committee looking into "Climategate", the scandal over leaked documents from the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, two things might have been obvious. The first was that all but one of the MPs (Labour's Graham Stringer) were hopelessly out of their depth in their efforts to understand this not very complex story. The other was that their chief purpose was to find that the CRU and its director, Professor Philip Jones, had done nothing wrong and that the case for man-made global warming remained intact.
Pages
