To Nick Smith from Dr Gerrit van der Lingen 16 October 2009

Dear Nick
> I am very disappointed about your actions in your global warming
> portfolio. You heard my two lectures on this subject at the Summer
> Sounds Symposia of 2003 and 2006. Because there is no scientific
> evidence whatsoever that human greenhouse gas emissions are causing
> catastrophic global warming, thousands of scientists consider this the
> biggest scam in human history. My wife Marianne and I last talked to
> you at the pre-dinner drinks at the Annual Conference of Architectural
> Designers last year. We discussed global warming and you said that you
> agreed with me. Your actions prove the opposite.

> You are a scientist and should therefore be able to evaluate the
> science. But you are also a politician and obviously see political
> advantage in pushing the global warming dogma. This is sad, but then,
> you are one of many politicians worldwide who support this ideology.
> There are few politicians who dare to stand up against this madness.
> One prominent one is Vaclav Klaus, the president of the Czech Republic
> . He correctly sees this global mass hysteria as a major threat to
> democratic freedoms. He even wrote a book, title /Blue Planet in Green
> shackles./
> Warmaholics like to say that there is consensus among scientists about
> dangerous man-made global warming. This is a blatant lie. Only
> recently, 32,000 American scientists, among them more than 9,000 PhDs,
> signed a petition to Congress in which they expressed serious doubt
> about the science behind the dogma. About $80 billion dollars have
> been spent in the past decade on climate research. No wonder many
> scientists cannot withstand the lure of the global warming gravy
> train. Generous research grants, travel to many conferences in exotic
> places, etc. The Americans call them rent-seekers.
> Your support of this scam is bound to backfire on you. There are many
> signs that the bubble is bursting. The planet has been cooling for the
> last decade. Peer-reviewed publications are suggesting that we may be
> in for a cooling period that could last several decades. This has
> caused warmaholics to panic. They are reacting shriller and shriller.
> Propaganda temperatures have increased substantially in the lead-up to
> the Copenhagen conference.
> Real-world data (NOT computer models) indicating cooling are: (1) the
> sun has been exceptionally quiet. Most of the time there are no
> sunspots at all. The sun is quieter than it has been in a hundred
> years. (2) The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has entered its cool
> phase. The PDO alternates between warm and cool periods, each lasting
> about 25 to 30 years. (3) The oceans have been cooling. This
> information comes from the 3000 ARGO floats scattered over all the
> oceans and seas that measure continuously the water temperatures up to
> 2000 metres depth, (4) Sea-ice cover around Antarctica has been the
> largest since satellite measurements began, (5) summer Arctic sea-ice
> cover was lowest in 2007. Since than it has increased again. Last
> summer saw 500,000 square km more sea-ice than in 2007.
> Signs are that it is very unlikely that a global agreement on a
> successor of the Kyoto Protocol will be reached in Copenhagen. So why
> are you pushing to get the ETS bill passed before Copenhagen? Why are
> you boasting that New Zealand will be the first to include agriculture
> in the ETS bill? Saying that ruminant methane emissions account for
> half our GHG emissions and should be reduced is a travesty of reality
> and science. I wrote an article on ruminant emissions for the farmer’s
> magazine /Country Wide. /You can find it here: www.climatescience.
> PDFs/ruminantsno tkyotovillains. pdf
> <>
> .
> You may also be interested in an article I recently wrote for the
> magazine /Energy NZ/. I attach a copy.
> How much a threat to democracy the scam is, is shown by the undue
> haste you are trying to ram through this ETS bill. But especially the
> farce of submissions to the Select Committee and now the present
> insulting haste to give people a chance to make oral submissions to
> the /Finance & Expenditure Select Committee./ Shame on you!
> We have tried to wake up people to the consequences of this draconian
> ETS Bill, which is not much better than Labour’s one. I am
> disappointed that for instance the Maoris are only now waking up to
> what the ETS bill will do to their extensive forest holdings. They
> can’t say that they were not warned. Last year I appeared twice on
> Vapi Kupenga’s Auckland Maori talk-back show, Twice I warned Maori
> about the detrimental effects of the ETS bill on their well-being, and
> especially on their forest holdings. The only reaction I got was
> praise from Titiwhai Hariwera.
> I will finish by putting a challenge to you. Recently an authoritative
> and definitive answer to the IPCC 2007 report was published in the US.
> The hefty, 868-page tome, titled /Climate Change Reconsidered,/ was
> written by the NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate
> Change). It reads easily and every argument and statement is backed up
> by references to the peer-reviewed literature. They looked at the same
> publications used by the IPCC, PLUS many peer-reviewed papers ignored
> by the IPCC because they did not fit in with their dogma. The IPCC is
> a political UN organization. They are not a neutral scientific
> organization. They are blatant advocates of the catastrophic man-made
> global warming dogma. Their only “proof” is non-validated computer
> models and gut-feelings. I challenge you, as a scientist, to read this
> book (you can order it from and come back to me explaining
> where you disagree with it (in case you do), and explain why.
> With kind regards
> Dr Gerrit van der Lingen
> I received the following answer from his private secretary, Corisha
> Brain, dated 20 October:
> Dear Gerrit van der Lingen
> On behalf of the Hon. Dr Nick Smith, Minister for Climate Change
> Issues, I acknowledge receipt of your email, received 16-Oct-09,
> regarding the ETS.
> Consideration is currently being given to the matters you raise in
> your letter and you may expect a reply at the Minister’s earliest
> opportunity.
> Yours Sincerely
> Corisha Brain
> Private Secretary – Climate Change
> It is now 18 November and I am still waiting for Nick Smith’s reply. I
> don’t expect one.
> Kind regards
> Gerrit van der Lingen