News Blog

From NewsBusters by Peter Sasso....

While guest hosting Wednesday’s "Morning Joe", former General Electric CEO Jack Welch condemned global warming, the very theory MSNBC has been peddling for years. GE, of course, owns MSNBC; the rebuke of MSNBC’s favorite alarmist hypothesis came in a segment where hosts share noteworthy editorials. Welch decided to share an opinion piece from Tuesday’s Wall Street Journal aptly titled "Global Warming As Mass Neurosis." Welch informed the audience that the article has "a lot of technical numbers here to show you that NASA overstated what's happening." Welch summarized the article by saying "And they got an argument that states that global warming is the attack on capitalism that socialism couldn't bring"

After Jack’s synopsis, co- host Pat Buchanan interjects his belief that global warming is "a neo-Marxist idea for the transfer of wealth and power." Jack Welch jumps in to agree saying "Right" Pat Buchanan then decides to carry his rebuke even further by saying "And At the end global elites, and they’re, you know they’re gonna to dictate to all of us because of this phony idea that we're all in some eminent danger. I agree with that 100 %." Welch, the former GE CEO enthusiastically jumped in to agree saying "Absolutely!"

From EngineeringNews by Dr Kelvin Kemm, formerly a scientist at South Africa’s Atomic Energy Corporation.

During 2008, have we seen many stories in the newspapers about 2007 being particularly warm as a result of global warming?
During 2006, the doomsters were predicting that 2007 would be the hottest year on record, so why have we seen no reports about this?

The answer is simple – 2007 turned out to be the coolest year for 30 years. It is also the case that there has been no global warming since 1998. In fact, since 1998, there has been steady cooling.

Even more dramatic is the fact that the most recent computer model predictions indicate that there will be no more global warming for the next ten years. But the doomsters say that, after this ten-year period, global warming will come back with a vengeance. Why?

Certainly, mankind's production of carbon dioxide (CO2) has continued to increase since 1998 and will continue to increase, particularly since countries such as China and India say that their economic growth comes first, so they do not intend worrying too much about CO2 production.

From Viv Forbes, BScApp, FAusIMM, FSIA

Chairman

The Carbon Sense Coalition

“Garnaut Report - Three Key Questions were Ignored.”

"Will the world follow our brave example or will Australia and New Zealand be left hanging like dead dingos on a barbed wire fence?"

An Australian Group of Global Warming Sceptics today claimed that the Garnaut Report had totally ignored the three key questions in the debate.

The chairman of The Carbon Sense Coalition, Mr Viv Forbes, said that the major question is a scientific one: “Have man’s emissions of CO2 caused unusual global warming or done harm to the world environment?” An increasing number of scientists all over the world are very clear on this and their answer is a resounding “NO”.

See the Oregon Petition and the Manhattan Declaration

It is irresponsible for the government to get this far without having an independent enquiry on the science, a fundamental first step in a rational due diligence of this massive economic intervention.

See Call for an Australian New Zealand Royal Commission

“The second question not considered by the Garnaut Report is “What are the full costs and benefits likely to accrue to Australians if we embark on this course?”

The Letters Editor

PM Rudd and his Emissions Trading System.

Many may have seen last night's ABC 7:30 Report. (03.07.08).

The main feature of the programme was an interview with P. M. Rudd. The subject of the interview was Climate Change and the dangers of CO2.

I am flabbergasted beyond belief that we have as Prime Minister, a man so dedicated to abolishing the industry, not to mention the living standards of this entire Nation.

What he proposes is a vast social experiment with the entire nation. An experiment every bit as potentially disastrous as the Russian experiment in Communism in the last century.

It seems to me that he intends that the at present successful industries of coal, iron ore, gold, oil and gas and agriculture will pay for it all as he compensates the population for the ever increasing costs. But even that will not be enough, as he and his treasurer embark on what must become the greatest inflation in Australian history.

We thought you would want to read a serious article concerning what people think about CO2 Sceptics, this is from the New Statesman by Mark Lynas.

Comment's are welcome on this.

The arguments of climate sceptics have largely been moulded by a far more sinister force - the US-based conservative think tanks

I am finding it increasingly difficult to maintain my optimism that we can stabilise global temperature increases below the "danger level" of 2°C. First, there is no sign that emissions are being reduced; rather, the opposite is happening. Second, it is becoming clear that the danger level for temperature increase is a good deal lower than 2°C.

The Arctic Sea ice cover is already approaching a new low. The new topic of speculation is not whether the Arctic ice will disappear completely in the summer months by 2080, but whether this will happen by 2018. An ice-free North Pole will have a significant effect on the planet's energy balance, given the important role this huge white "mirror" plays in reflecting incoming solar radiation. Once it is gone, the warming process can only speed up further. Already, a new study suggests that an ice-free Arctic Ocean will dramatically increase warming in surrounding land areas, accelerating the degradation of permafrost and resulting in huge releases of carbon and methane -driving yet more warming. Setting a danger level of 2°C, as the UK and EU have done, now looks dangerously optimistic.

The Guardian seems to have their share of "green" and "environmental" news at the moment, this time Tim Yeo gives a break down on the Car "Green Tax" in the UK.

The chancellor is under fire from both Labour and Conservative MPs over the changes he announced to annual road tax (vehicle excise duty, or VED) in this year's budget. What has united these critics is the proposal to raise – and, in many cases, double – the road tax on those cars with the worst emissions that are already on the road. Cars in Band F that were bought between 2001 and 2006 are currently charged £210 a year. From 2010, this will go up to between £270 and £455, depending on the amount of their emissions.

This is unfair, say the critics. Green tax is meant to change behaviour – otherwise, it's just a tax. Unlike fuel duty, VED doesn't vary with the amount you drive. So changing behaviour, in the case of VED, can only mean changing people's mind about which car to buy. But how can people change their mind about a car that has already been bought?

They are digging deep to win you over with guilt on consumer goods, this time according to the Telegraph by John Bingham, if you buy a Flat screen TV your adding to "Man Made Climate Change", what an absolute load of tosh!

If there is a real scientist in the house, please explain to us how they calculate this nonsense.

The boom in flatscreen television could be fuelling global warming more than official estimates, scientists have warned.

Experts in California estimate that production of a powerful greenhouse gas used in their production has hit 4,000 tonnes a year - enough to match the annual carbon dioxide emissions of Austria.

Research published in New Scientist estimates that the industrial component - known as "NF3" - is 17,000 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. But it is not covered by the Kyoto protocol because it was only made in tiny amounts when the agreement was signed in 1997.

Now listen to this, we have a Journalist from the Guardian (Tahmima Anam) saying that the Government should make people fear "Man Made Climate Change", you could not make it up!

We agree that we should be in fear of a Journalist who wants to spread fear and anxiety about the non scientific cause of MMCC. Tahmima Anam went on to say the recent cyclone in Bangladesh was the result of MMCC, Ok Tahmima, you can make it up!

Two recent polls attempting to judge the public mood about climate change have revealed contradictory results. Last week's Ipsos Mori poll told us that most people doubt the human causes of climate change. Yesterday's Guardian/ICM poll told a slightly different story, one of a growing concern with climate change, with many people considering it a higher priority than the faltering economy.

The roots of scepticism can be traced to many sources. In this newspaper on Monday, Peter Wilby criticised the media for not doing its part to lend credibility to the argument. Some have pointed the finger at that fateful Channel 4 documentary, The Great Global Warming Swindle; others at the sometimes contradictory messages from environmentalists. Whatever the reason, there is no doubt that many people still remain unsure of the causes of climate change, and the seriousness with which we need to tackle it.

The scientists and campaigners have done their best. The IPCC's latest report states that there is a 90% chance that humans are the main cause of climate change. Al Gore has gone around the world with graphs and arresting photographs of the melting Arctic ice, proving that climate change really is happening. And, of course, there is the anecdotal evidence: everyone knows someone who has witnessed an extreme storm, or had their house flooded, or watched from a balcony as the Asian tsunami leapt from the sea.

Updated Below