Thoughts on the ETS- Alan Nicholl

The ETS has been in force for several months now and already it has shut down several businesses, because of the increased cost of energy. Most appear to have been food producers. Many others are struggling, because of the cost increases and the effects of the recession. Consumers have less buying power, because of the increased cost of basic needs, the ETS has forced upon them. What purpose does it achieve, except to increase the profit margins of energy suppliers? There is no effect on the climate nor will there ever be. It will make no difference to climate change as any increase in CO2 does not cause a corresponding increase in temperatures, as is shown buy the current cooling trend. Over the last 10 years 20 parts per million of CO2 have been added, but the temperature is falling.

The next phase is now under way with the removal of property rights from those who own forestry, especially pre 1990. At least those who own post 1990 forestry have the choice to tie their land up in trees and saddle it with a liability far in excess of the land value. In other words the land becomes worthless and no one will ever want to buy it.

When will politicians grow the balls to repeal this insipidly stupid piece of legislation and embrace the real science, which is endeavouring to understand the actual causes of climate change(both warming and cooling)?

Both the Antarctica and Greenland ice cores when studied in depth show no cause for alarm over the possibility that CO2 will cause runaway warming. In fact the opposite is true, CO2 increases follow warming. Ironically both Antarctica and Greenland primarily are cooling, not warming as the UN IPCC would have you believe. Both core samples show that over the last 5,000 years there have been 6 warm periods including the present. The Minoan, Roman and Mediaeval warm periods are shown to be considerably warmer than now.

Both radiosonde (balloon measurement) and satellite temperature recording show a new cooling phase has begun since 1998. It is now 12 years in and scientist see no evidence of it ending, possibly for several decades. This will cause far more distress to humanity than any warming has ever caused in the past. History tells us that warm periods were highly beneficial to humanity with great strides made in getting us where we are today. The cores also reveal that the little ice age was the coldest period over the same time span. Crops failed, trade came to a standstill and millions died. The same can happen again, and will, if politicians continue down this ridiculous path of national and global self destruction.

The UN is doing itself no favours by continuing down this path of pushing a theory that has no scientific backing. The information I have from scientists and reviewers, is that the 1995 final draft submitted for printing stated there was no evidence implicating human activity as a contributing factor in global warming. Yet when the printed version appeared those phrases had been removed and ones blaming human CO2 usage inserted. Who authorised the deliberate falsification of the report and for what reason?

Understandably many scientists are upset and angry over this travesty and some have even threatened legal action against the UN to have their names removed from the list used by the UN to authenticate their lies.

Also, the reliance on computer modelling and the modification of raw temperature data is not a scientific base at all. The release of the climate gate emails reveal what they are prepared to do to push this stupidity through. The only conclusion one can draw is that this is not about climate control but political control. Even here in NZ NIWA have had to back away from what until recently was the official temperature record. It now appears that there is no such thing as an official record. The question is, why was the raw data manipulated in the first place to show 1 degree of warming when no such warming has occurred? Why also did Nick Smith rely on this unofficial record to promote the need of the ETS? Since Copenhagen the climate has already exposed the folly of this utterly ridiculous theory. The last 2 northern winters have been severe and the prediction is this one will be the worst for 1,000 years. Even here in NZ the climate is noticeably cooler. The last 2 springs have been cooler and lasted longer making cropping and farming difficult. Growth rates are slower because of colder ground temperatures. It is very noticeable.

Stop being blinded by the guilt campaign being waged by those with a vested interest in pushing dangerous global warming, who are being funded with billions of dollars of taxpayer money. Instead listen to those who are involved in the sciences and are striving to understand what is happening. Then maybe we will be able to adapt to whatever changes are actually taking place, whether warming or cooling, and so be more prepared to meet any challenges the climate will throw at us. A rapidly increasing population requires that agriculture has the ability to adapt to changing climate conditions, and not be hampered by stupid and ridiculous costs imposed on energy use. They are designed to restrict the use of what is desperately needed for food production and its distribution.

Soon the politicians and bureaucrats will converge on Cancun in another attempt to inflict their global warming policies upon nations, especially those developed nations who feed the world. The idea is to force them to pay exorbitant penalties under the guise of redistributing wealth to developing nations. What will happen is that developed nations will become unable to support themselves, let alone being able to help developing nations to grow. The most favourable outcome from this meeting would be an admission that they have got it all wrong. Fat chance that happening. The next best thing is simply another waste of taxpayer money and no conclusion arrived at. Let’s hope this is what happens and that no climate control agreement eventuates.

Billions of dollars have already been wasted going down this track with no chance of success in controlling the climate, so why not admit defeat and address the more pressing problems facing the lives of humans. Problems we can do something about.