Home > Current Affairs, Politics - Domestic, The EYE-BALL EnvironmentZone, The EYE-BALL Opinion > CARBON is not the ENEMY – … hoodwinked Leaders wearing DUNCE hats are …

CARBON is not the ENEMY – … hoodwinked Leaders wearing DUNCE hats are …

Title: CARBON is not the ENEMY –
… hoodwinked Leaders wearing DUNCE hats are …
[updated 12th Jly 2011]
Thought of the Day: … By right of passage yielding respect to people who represent themselves as smarter and more credentialed have our automatic respect – what if they were just as dumb and ignorant as the rest of us under pressure …
There is reason to just stand back and take stock for a moment after a tumultuous day in Australian Politics and the media spin on the Carbon Tax debate engaged across the length and breath of this Nation. The rest of the World are either laughing at the position this Government has placed itself – or rubbing their hands together at how we are handing our natural heritage and resource advantaged to a World already tinkering over an abyss that they can not recover from any time soon.Whatever the ‘detail’ is in the summary of the CARBON TAXpackage – it is detail that will fail at the earliest obstacles. I became a sceptic some months ago when I went looking for the research into both sides of the debate – and after having seen the Government flip-flop three times on ETS and Carbon Tax three times since Copenhagen.All I found was enough conflicting data to convince me the debate on CARBON as the worst emissions pollutant is far form settled. Yet – the ALP and its minorities together with their policy makers have been shunted into a reversal of its pre-election promise of – ‘No Carbon Tax’ under a ALP Government. ALP had to do this to keep Government – and the GREENS have now pushed this Nation to the CARBON TAX announcements made today.

This is the first flaw in this whole big boohar and the crux that makes todays announcement one of the most stupid positional policy announcements any Government has made in this Nations history. Look at the credentials of those involved in the architecture of the policy – from the ALP side – Combet – Swan and PM Gillard – the latter a suppressed leftist socialist – COMBET a Unionist who moved from Victoria to take up a safe NSW Labour seat at the 2007 election – and Mr SWAN the most inept Treasurer in a generation.

The GREENS – Senators Brown and Milne – Tasmanian tree-huggers with a long history of environment activism – but absolutely no science degree or economic modeling experience from either – and the other Independents – Oakeshot – Windsor – and Wilkie – all aware that any new election would see them all struggle to win their seats.

This makes this a case of who is more desperate to hang onto power – The GREENs are flexing their muscles – ALP are responding so they can maintain Government – and the Independents – there vote is essential to get the Carbon Tax through the House – the GREENs will ensure it gets through the Senate. What the PM – the GREENs – and the Independents have not factored in – is a revolt from the ALP backbenchers – and there are some serious mumblings in that corner.

The Carbon Tax policy announced today is relying on so-called economic scientist modeling – all based on a proven Climate Change argument and as presented by so called ‘senior’ scientists as ‘unrefuted proof’ that Climate Change caused by human interface is happening. It has to be pointed out that all the science used in the Government making its decision that the science is proven – comes from the CSRIO and other Government funded Climate Change research – all recipients of Government grant funding to ‘prove’ Climate change – a scenario where vested interests are served by the announcement today.

A more corrupted and bankrupted paid for science outcome could not have been better devised if the intent was to purposely defraud the Australian taxpayers.

The documentary Titled: “The Great Global Warming Swindle” – first shown on the UK’s Channel 4 in March 2007 – produces a conclusion that leaves no doubt that the debate is far from conclusive. This Documentary can be viewed on-line via the link provided HERE – it goes for 75 min and is ad free … it is a must see event if you are looking for real reasons to doubt the Climate Change debate and want your questions answered.

Please – this policy announcement is a very important issue and if you are unsure of the realness of the divide between the warring sides of this debate – give yourself every opportunity to review a quality presentation from sceptics from four years ago. It’s conclusions were refuted by an Australian ABC hosted show shortly after its release – Tony Jones from Q&A fame hosted the rebuttal forum and there are many YouTube replays depicting and refuting the Channel 4 documentary. One such YouTube link is provided below – [updated 12th July 2011.]

Further YouTube Links to more parts of the Tony Jones presented ABC rebuttals are provided below:

At the time the GREAT GLOBAL WARMING SWINDLE Documentary was released [Mar 2007] – the CSRIO Climate Change scientist’s in the other corner came out with their rebuttals. Those comments can be read on-line HERE – and is further pasted below:

Refuting The Great Global Warming Swindle television program

What two of our scientists say about the television program, The Great Global Warming Swindle, which was first shown in the UK in March 2007, and scheduled for screening on ABC TV, Australia on 12 July 2007.

Dr Michael Raupach

Dr Penny Whetton

The Age newspaper’s Green Guide sought scientific responses to the documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, as shown in Australia on ABC TV, 8.30 pm, 12 July 2007, from CSIRO scientists, Dr Penny Whetton and Dr Mike Raupach.

The responses appear here with permission of The Age. Review of The Great Global Warming Swindle: Dr Michael Raupach, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research ‘I am one of many scientists who have studied the interactions between carbon dioxide (CO2) and climate for decades, concluding that CO2 is an agent of global warming and that humanity must reduce CO2 emissions.

‘The Swindle puts forth such a different view that it is difficult to begin a rational dialogue. Its contentions are that CO2 does not cause global warming, efforts to reduce CO2 emissions are misplaced and even ‘anti-human’, and scientists advocating emissions reductions are self-serving, fund-grabbing puppets of a neo-Marxist movement intent on overthrowing capitalism.’

‘Two questions arise. First, is The Swindle based on sound science? The answer, emphatically and objectively, is no.’ “Is The Swindle based on sound science? The answer, emphatically and objectively, is no.”

Dr Mike Raupach CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research ‘The Swindle makes its case by employing several massive distortions: use of old data now known to contain errors, omitting recent high-quality data, ‘bending’ graphs, presenting falsehoods as facts, and drawing illogical conclusions from observations. These distortions have been well exposed in several excellent critiques available on the web.’

‘The second question is: why do a few scientists so torture the evidence? The usual answer, that they are in the pockets of oil companies, is probably inadequate. A more fundamental reason may be philosophical – those who attack the links between CO2 and human-induced climate change believe that the planetary machinery is too vast to be thrown off course by mere humankind, and that the global commons are a permanent resource for human exploitation. Science now shows that this is a dangerous delusion.

We have the power to foul our own planetary nest, and are already doing so through CO2 emissions. The leap we must make in just a few decades is to accept stewardship of the global commons. The position taken in The Swindle is a dangerous dead weight as we endeavour to face this entirely new and absolutely critical challenge.’

Documentary a Swindle: Dr Penny Whetton, Leader of the Climate Impact and Risks Group, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research ‘Mr Martin Durkin’s documentary purports to show that climate change is neither unusual nor due to human activity. In making these claims, the film ignores the vast amount of evidence that supports human-caused climate change, and selects a few points which, with some careful spin, can be made to appear to support the film’s case.’

‘None of the arguments presented in the film are new, and none have passed scientific scrutiny when they were raised previously. As a result, the film is highly misleading.’ “’None of the arguments presented in the film are new, and none have passed scientific scrutiny.” Dr Penny Whetton, Leader of the Climate Impact and Risks Group, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research ‘For the record, current research (ignored by Mr Durkin) shows atmospheric temperature measurements are consistent with projections from climate models.’

‘Current CO2-induced global warming is not invalidated by ice-core records showing temperature rises in advance of CO2 rises. Those prehistoric warmings had a different trigger to the current one, unrelated to human activities.’ ‘Further, variations in the output of the Sun cannot explain the large warming that has occurred between 1950s to the present (as demonstrated in published scientific results, conveniently ignored by Mr Durkin). It can only be explained by increased greenhouse gases due to human activities.’ ‘This film not only says that the conventional view of climate change is wrong, it accuses those who disseminate that view of lying.

Like many scientists who have worked in this area of research for more than a decade, I felt personally attacked. This accusation is very serious and requires supporting evidence, but there is not a skerrick given in the film.’ ‘Mr Durkin is happy to use graphs that are many years out-of-date, omit key facts and promulgate ideas that had been rejected by the scientific process. This is the real swindle.’

‘This documentary is one man’s highly distorted view of climate change science dressed up to look like a serious documentary. It is an abuse of the genre and of the trust of the audience it will attract.’ ‘If this was a mockumentary it might be funny, but the ABC’s decision to broadcast this misinformation as a genuine documentary has to be questioned.’ Find out more about the work being done into Understanding Climate Change.

My response to the above CSRIO rebuttal comments are they are retrospectively absent of any confirming data – and far less convincing than the facts and conclusions presented in the Documentary. That is one of the reasons why the YouTube links have been provided – Tony Jones ABC Presenter] – does a good job in destroying the creditability of the Producer and the facts presented in the “The Great Global Warming Swindle” documentary – but not to the point where pro-Climate Change scientist have completely convinced me to the contra position.

I remain sceptical – and mainly because Carbon – is the essence of life – Carbon provides our food – Carbon is good and the thought that Governments want to tax it – gives me great pause that this is just another TAX grab by another inept Government.

Recently – and as part of my want to better understand the science – I contacted the CSRIO myself and spoke with their PR Manager – Mr Simon Torok about my research and reasons for my scepticism. Mr Torok sent me an extensive Library of research material – [all linked below] – and compiled by the CSRIO Climate Change research team.

I have read these CSRIO reports and remain unconvinced – mainly because the CSRIO does not take the time to provide its evidence in a simplistic way that can easily refute the logic and easily understood context of the Documentary.

The CSRIO assumes the research outcome and its conclusions in scientific terms and leaves no question or doubt that their conclusions are indisputable. This to me represents more of a reason to be sceptical in itself.

Mr Torok’s contact information was provided and is reproduced hereto: Simon Torok | Communication Manager | CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research| Phone 03 9239 4645| Fax 03 9239 4444 | Mobile 0409 844 302| Private Bag 1, Aspendale VIC 3195 Australia| www.CSRIO.au/cmr.

Mr Torok was also kind enough to answer my questions for 20 mins and sent me the following links to help with my research. He was absolute in his belief that the ‘sceptics’ were wrong and whenever I tried to ask a question that challenged this belief – he remained patient as suggested I needed to read the CSRIO papers to become convinced that what he was telling me was the real truth in the debate. The CSIRO database links he sent me appear below …

The debate is a scientific debate and I do not profess to understand – or be able to interpret all the data. All the global Climate Change research undertaken to prove Climate Change is funded by Government’s around the World.

That fact immediately gives me a disposition to believe the sceptic side of the debate – but does not make me a screaming doubter of all the information put up by the Climate Change science. Governments are not funding science to disprove Climate Change and that to my way of thinking gives and inequality to the debate I am just simply saying that to be in a position where the Australian Government has advanced head-long into a carbon pricing mechanism – without first having taken the time to convince Australian voters about the science – is politics being played out with a dynamite stick shoved up its ass.

The crap when this ‘hoodwink’ explodes is going to stick to everybody. Politicians need to speak up and express their true belief.

As disclosed in the documentary – politicians are hedging their bets and do not want to be drawn into absolute positions on this matter.

In a previous post on this subject – I advised that I wrote to some 21 Ministers and Mr Turnbull – see post here – asking then to share and outline their ‘lightbulb’ moment that made them a convinced Climate Change supporter.

None have returned that invitation. To me that is an absolute statement of two facts – the first is Politicians feel no accountability to their constituency – and that none of the Politicians written to – or their staffers – saw enough of a reason to respond to the invitation.

I drew my own conclusion that they were too scared to voice their opinion for fear of where that opinion may have ended up – that in itself suggests the Members written to as unconvinced of their own status on the matter and some intimidation for their position within their electorate and Party. Now – if the debate was more about reforming the tax system – and using clean energy tax offsets as a means to fund the tax reform – is that not about the same outcome we have now but a debate that would make a lot more sense to the voting public.

Please – if you want a clear and concise summary of the SCEPTIC rational – watch the Documentary linked above and then go looking and asking questions from the Climate Change believers to tell you where and why the information in the Documentary is not proof positive that this debate is far from settled …


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

  1. Oztruth
    July 11, 2011 at 10:53 pm

    Good article Eye-ball.

    When Gillard was elected, 75% of Australians were willing to pay a carbon tax. Today, that percentage is 41! Additionally, Labour is getting hammered in the polls.The people have spoken, yet the tax is passed anyway? If the Government isn’t listening to the people, then who are they listening to? Al Gore and his Rothschild/Rockerfeller masters?

    And what about a sodium chloride tax? To hell with it, a hydrgen oxide tax!

  2. July 12, 2011 at 7:52 am

    Thanks Oztruth –

    Story has been updated with more research feedback – i.e. YouTube links to Tony Jones’s [ABC Q&A] forum that took on the “The Great Global Warming Swindle” to task on the science as presented in the Documentary …

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: