To the Select Committee from Andy W 12 October 2009


The IPCC is not a reliable scientific body. Grave concerns about the review process and content have been raised by respected scientific commentators and climate scientists, including IPCC expert reviewers - several of them New Zealanders!
The bulk of the IPCC's findings and recommendations rely on a small core  of high-profile studies. Amongst these is the "Hockey stick" graph by NASA Scientists Hansen and Mann. These individuals are key players in the history of the theory of AGW but are also NOT experts in the statistical analyses they employed to produce these published papers. Expert reviewers of their work have published serious criticisms of their methods and drawn attention to unsound conclusions they reached. The IPCC has acknowledged these findings, and many other serious criticisms, yet, the NZ Government has proceeded with plans to put in place an emissions trading scheme, when NO SOUND EVIDENCE of Anthropogenic Global Warming exists outside a core group of now seriously compromised figures.
Further, Al Gore's thesis, presented in his highly overrated and mediocre work "An Inconvenient Truth" has been slated world-wide as riddled with inaccuracies and downright lies (if not, then seriously poor research which casts doubt on the validity of the rest of the work).
Respected Scientists, with very successful careers, considered experts in their fields, have been ridiculed and silenced by the media and the IPCC itself, labeled "Skeptics". They have patiently sought audience with the IPCC, media and government and received discourteous and unprofessional treatment.
Simple facts remain as blights on the AGW theory - these aren't subjective or "points of view" but facts delivered by the same methods and research networks which, a decade ago, were telling us that the earth's temperature was warming.
The science of measuring the earth's temperature and sea level change are in their infancy and can by no means can it be claimed that they can provide the basis for government policy. Global polar ice formation and seasonal variations likewise are uncertain pursuits - and reality thus far is resistant to the theories at the heart of the IPCC claims. East Antarctic ice, both sea and land-based, is growing at unprecedented rates, while the West Antarctic peninsular is doing what it has done at many times in the past - responding to warm ocean currents. Similarly, glaciers worldwide, rather than being "poster boys" of AGW claims, are, it is pointed out by glaciation experts, responding to climatic events from 100, 1000, and even 100,000 years ago, depending on the size of the glacier. Al Gore's favourite glacier, on the summit of Mt Kilimanjaro, has suffered shrinkage due to drastic reduction in forestation over the past 150 years. These studies and many more which fly in the face of the theory of AGW are not hard to find and are peer reviewed and in respected journals. Sadly, the record of AGW has cast doubts on the process of peer review and damaged the reputation of scient. The public are sick and tired of over-blown drama and doom-laden warnings.
Unless the NZ Government simply committed to taking millions of dollars off hard working citizens to fund a new financial mafia, it is impossible for you to justify the ETS on scientific grounds.
And even if the AGW could find some scientific proof, the suggestion that a commodity market is the solution is simply laughable. With the Kiwi Saver scheme in place, we can see how fragile and unpredictable this idea is. Thousands of New Zealand citizens have been duped into allowing their hard-earned salaries to fall into the hands of the financial markets. And the same will happen if you rip us off to fund this new piece of madness.
The idea that capitalist financial markets and economists can solve the world's problems is as rediculous as the claim that homeopathy can cure cancer. It is insulting to people in the world who suffer real hardship.
Best regards
Andy W