Members' Contributions

The initial commentary below, is regarding the Australian Greens trying to put a price on carbon. The rest, related to extreme green philosophy shows just how scary some of their views are.

--Part of the big agreement yesterday announced by Labor and Green honchos was the set-up of a multi-party parliamentary committee to put a price on carbon. You can read about it here. But when you read about it, it's clear that it's a pretty undemocratic way of pretending to have a debate without having a debate. Typical, but pretty cynical. And as ever with the political class, it defers to the exalted power of "experts."

Speech to the Institute of Public Affairs, Melbourne, Australia

by Hon Rodney Hide

October 7 2010

Professor Bob Carter has written the best book on the science of human-induced global warning I have read.

It’s a very significant book. It will save countless lives. These would be the lives lost should the world’s poor be condemned to the grinding poverty implicit in the now world-wide political goal of dramatically curtailing the use of fossil fuels.

That goal, in turn, is driven by the so-called scientific consensus and by pronouncements from on high from the UN’s Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change.
These summarised are that continued industrialisation will condemn us to catastrophic global warming in a hundred years or so. Therefore we must act, and act immediately before it is too late.

By Richard Treadgold, Climate Conversation Group

http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz

Three weeks ago NIWA released their Statement of Defence in response to the NZ Climate Science Coalition’s Statement of Claim regarding an Application for a Judicial Review. You have to be a lawyer (which I’m not) to see the ramifications and it’s taking a while to work through it, but these are my first reactions and I can’t hold them back any longer.

Most of this will upset NIWA’s supporters. If you’re a NIWA supporter, go find a buddy to hug before reading on. This will rock your world.

Because NIWA formally denies all responsibility for the national temperature record (NZTR).

 From the Pastural Farming Climate Research organisation:

Members newsletter:

Held in Dargaville earlier this month it attracted a crowd of 4 farmers. I thought the 8 that turned out previously in Dargaville to hear John Boscawen on his ETS tour was a poor turnout, but apparently not.

So does this mean farmers don’t care too much about the ETS and their liability and are just getting on with the job of being a farmer? Or is it just that it has been a long fight, and we are getting weary, which is what our opponents want, and in September a farm can be a lot more demanding of time than the worries of a future financial liability?

The four farmers there though were highly motivated. Because the group was so small each got to say why they had come and what they wanted from the day. All were sceptical of what the Government and Dairy NZ and Fonterra are saying about livestock emissions and wanted to know how they could possibly cause global warming. One of the farmers, as well as being sceptical about the role enteric methane plays in global warming stated quite bluntly he was there to see what Dairy NZ was doing with his levy money to represent farmers concerns about this.

NZ Herald

A new survey suggests concern about climate change has slipped slightly from a year ago.

The UMR Research poll done on behalf of the Greenhouse Policy Coalition, which represents some of the larger greenhouse gas emitters, said climate change rated bottom in order of importance to people outof a list of 10 common issues - adrop from eighth out of nine issuesin the same survey last year.

Those issues in 2010 were (in order of concern) cost of living, health, education, ethics in business, environment, effect of the economy on household, taxes, employment, standard of living compared with other countries and climate change.

The proportion of people agreeing that climate change was a serious issue fell from 42.6 per cent last year to 36.3 per cent, the survey showed.

20 September 2010

Mr Kloppers of BHP says that “the mainstream science is correct, and we need to stabilise (and eventually reduce) the carbon concentration in the atmosphere”.

It is politically motivated and is based on false conclusions derived from fraudulent practises. Climategate is one example. The UN IPCC is supposedly firing those who have made it look stupid over climate change. I doubt they will go far enough and fire the lot. The primary scientists have admitted warming to date has been due to natural causes, not human based.

Taxing human produced CO2 will not alter the climate as CO2 is a bit player in climate change. The govt.s own literature shows decreasing temperatures since 1998, in spite of increasing CO2. Scientists predict this will continue until between 2030 and 2060. This is not a short term glitch. Obviously something else governs climate change.