Want to save earth? Use cows & sheep. Really!

Interesting video from over at Watts Up With That.

Want to know EXACTLY how to save the planet?  Simple: put more grazing animals on the grasslands - with planned farming techniques and rotation. This SAVES grasslands and prevents "desertification".

Want more grass, more green and a healthier planet? 
Easy: farm more cows and sheep! 

Check it out:

Unlikely to exercise any influence on future climate

Open letter to head of UN today in the Financial Post from group of scientists.

"Policy actions that aim to reduce CO2 emissions are unlikely to influence future climate. Policies need to focus on preparation for, and adaptation to, all dangerous climatic events, however caused"

Hattip Watts Up With That :

"November 29, 2012

Mr. Secretary-General:

On November 9 this year you told the General Assembly: “Extreme weather due to climate change is the new normal … Our challenge remains, clear and urgent: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to strengthen adaptation to … even larger climate shocks … and to reach a legally binding climate agreement by 2015 … This should be one of the main lessons of Hurricane Sandy.”

On November 13 you said at Yale: “The science is clear; we should waste no more time on that debate.”
 
The following day, in Al Gore’s “Dirty Weather” Webcast, you spoke of “more severe storms, harsher droughts, greater floods”, concluding: “Two weeks ago, Hurricane Sandy struck the eastern seaboard of the United States. A nation saw the reality of climate change. The recovery will cost tens of billions of dollars. The cost of inaction will be even higher. We must reduce our dependence on carbon emissions.”

We the undersigned, qualified in climate-related matters, wish to state that current scientific knowledge does not substantiate your assertions. " ...

... "Based upon these considerations, we ask that you desist from exploiting the misery of the families of those who lost their lives or properties in tropical storm Sandy by making unsupportable claims that human influences caused that storm. They did not. We also ask that you acknowledge that policy actions by the U.N., or by the signatory nations to the UNFCCC, that aim to reduce CO2 emissions are unlikely to exercise any significant influence on future climate. Climate policies therefore need to focus on preparation for, and adaptation to, all dangerous climatic events however caused."
===
SO WILL THE SECRETARY-GENERAL RESPOND?

I seriously doubt it - there is BIG MONEY involved with keeping people fooled about "man made" global warming - TAXES.

Gubmits TAX CITIZENS in guise of 'saving the planet' when all that does is LINE THEIR POCKETS!!

Monckton on eligibility, AGW, communism, Alinsky

hattip Ann Barnhardt

Lord Monckton clearly explains the Alinsky rules to shut down skepticism regarding the BC fraud posted on the White House's website and AGW...


Speaking of AGW deniers, Australia has taken a big step back from the carbon cliff with their recent Queensland and Victoria elections.  Jo Nova explains:

"We shouldn’t underestimate shift that has just taken place. The psychology of Australian politics moved as the large swinging center was revealed. Not only was the Queensland election worse for Labor than anyone predicted, the message was clear, voters rejected the lies, and rejected the carbon tax. The smear campaign by the Labor leader (Bligh) did more harm to her than it did to her target. Finally, the Hype-and-Spin Machine ran off the rails. This is real progress. Today both Queensland and Victoria are peeling back the warmist bureaucracy. I’m happy. The new premier of Queensland Campbell Newman, is scrapping many state carbon reduction schemes. Who knew that the head of Queensland’s Office of Climate Change was none other than Mr Withers, husband of former Premier Anna Bligh? Who said the Labor Party nowadays is just about government money for supporters and mates? Campbell Newman has said he won’t sack Withers. Instead he wants him to unwind all the programs he put in place. Newman is keeping the solar subsidies for household rooftops, but everything else is being dumped."

GOOD on ya, Australia!

UK waking up: STOP wind farm madness!

cartoon from AT

The UK is waking up to the horrible madness of green energy scam: bird killing wind turbines:
Why the £250bn wind power industry could be the greatest scam of our age - and here are the three 'lies' that prove it: "Scarcely a day goes by without more evidence to show why the Government's obsession with wind turbines, now at the centre of our national energy policy, is one of the greatest political blunders of our time.  Under a target agreed with the EU, Britain is committed within ten years — at astronomic expense — to generating nearly a third of its electricity from renewable sources, mainly through building thousands more wind turbines. 

But the penny is finally dropping for almost everyone — except our politicians — that to rely on windmills to keep our lights on is a colossal and very dangerous act of self-deception.

Here in a nutshell are some of the reasons why people are beginning to wake up to the horrific downside of the wind business. And since I began writing about wind turbines nine years ago, I have come to see how the case for them rests on three great lies.

1) The first is the pretence that turbines are anything other than ludicrously inefficient

2) The second great lie about wind power is the pretence that it is not a preposterously expensive way to produce electricity. No one would dream of building wind turbines unless they were guaranteed a huge government subsidy.

3) The third great lie of the wind propagandists is that this industry is somehow making a vital contribution to 'saving the planet' by cutting our emissions of CO2. Even if you believe that curbing our use of fossil fuels could change the Earth's climate, the CO2 reduction achieved by wind turbines is so insignificant that one large windfarm saves considerably less in a year than is given off over the same period by a single jumbo jet flying daily between Britain and America."

(Irish) Engineers call for halt to wind farm investment:  "A new report from the Academy of Engineering will today call for a halt to investment in wind farms and power interconnections because of the huge cost it will place on industry.

It will state that Ireland already has the most expensive electricity in Europe and that this is causing a major problem for national competitiveness, putting Irish industry under severe pressure at the worst possible time."

Energy policy based on renewables will win hearts but won't protect their owners from frostbite and death due to exposure:   "Why does the entire green spectrum, which now incorporates most conventional parties across Europe, deny the most obvious of truths? To play lethal games with our energy systems in order to honour the whimsical god of climate change is as intelligent and scientific as the Aztec sacrifice of their young. Actually, it is far more frivolous, because at least the Aztecs knew how many people they were sacrificing: no one has the least idea of the loss of life that might result from the EU embracing "green" energy policies."

Climate alarmism: cold or hot = same solution?

Zombie at PJMedia  asks "The Coming of the New Ice Age: End of the Global Warming Era?" and has "just finished reading a terrifying new book about climate change. (Zombie) learned:

• Climate change is happening faster than we realize and it will have catastrophic consequences for mankind.
• There’s very little we can do to stop it at this late stage, but we might be able to save ourselves if we immediately take these necessary and drastic steps:

- Increase our reliance on alternative energy sources and stop using so much oil and other carbon-based fuels;
- Adopt energy-efficient practices in all aspects of our lives, however inconvenient;
- Impose punitive taxes on inefficient or polluting activities to discourage them;
- Funnel large sums of money from developed nations like the U.S. to Third World nations;
- In general embrace all environmental causes.

You of course recognize these as the solutions most often recommended to ameliorate the looming crisis of Global Warming. But there’s a little glitch in my narrative. Because although the book I read was indeed about climate change, it wasn’t about Global Warming at all; it was instead about “The Coming of the New Ice Age,” and it isn’t exactly “new” — it was published in 1977.

The Solution Remains the Same

As many other pundits and analysts have pointed out, in the mid-to-late 1970s we endured a massive “climate change scare” that was the exact opposite of the one we’re enduring now. Back then, the media and activists trumpeted the arrival of a new ice age, with the specter of ice sheets and glaciers covering half the northern hemisphere, and brutal winters in the remaining ice-free zones.

The fact that the media and popular culture and academia have veered from one panic-inducing disaster scenario to another one which completely contradicts the first one is funny enough in its own right. But reading The Weather Conspiracy: The Coming of the New Ice Age opened my eyes to an even more significant aspect of this serial crisis-mongering:

The “solutions” prescribed to solve both Global Warming and the looming Ice Age are exactly the same."

Good points Zombie... funny that...

Climategate 2.0: can another huge storm of truth be ignored by warmists?

a storm of truth in the distance?

Yep, 2 years ago there was Climategate 1.0 - now there are more emails released - with even more damning evidence of the scam (that the very tiny bit of C02 man emits has ANY effect on "global" warming of the planet). Truth seekers are calling it Climategate 2.0. 

Here are a few examples of the liar's emails - which only prove their AGW political-activism-ideology.  (< look! an "ology"!).... Hey, we are the "scientists" with grant money - you must believe us, our "science" is SETTLED - because we (the IPCC and alarmists!) want our money to continue - just so we can spew our ideology! ... Flipping amazing:

<5315> Jenkins/MetO:




would you agree that there is no convincing evidence for kilimanjaro glacier melt being due to recent warming (let alone man-made warming)?


<2423> Lanzante/NOAA:




While perhaps one could designate some subset of models as being poorer in a lot of areas, there probably never will be a single universally superior model or set of models. We should keep in mind that the climate system is complex, so that it is difficult, if not impossible to define a metric that captures the breath of physical processes relevant to even a narrow area of focus.


<4443> Jones:


Basic problem is that all models are wrong - not got enough middle and low level clouds.

Much more here, here or here to get you started...

$535 MILLION dollar green boondoggle

more money up in smoke due to lame liberal policies

Shocker! (not really)... More GREEN FAIL by the Obumbles administration:  $535 MILLION dollars vanished into thin air as an Oblather-touted company Solyndra has gone bankrupt.  "Solyndra is a prime example of the foolish green schemes Barack Obama and his team have been promoting across America.  Sadly, this promotion has been more than just Obama-like airy platitudes about moon shots and being world leaders. The taxpayers are on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars that Obama extended as loan guarantees."

Just great America... You are going the route of Greece AND Spain now!  Crikey...

its the cosmic rays, stupid: CLOUDs break some warmist dams

Plasma from the sun

From Plasmas.org "Plasma is by far the most common form of matter. Plasma in the stars and in the tenuous space between them makes up over 99% of the visible universe and perhaps most of that which is not visible."

"Plasma temperatures and densities range from relatively cool and tenuous (like aurora) to very hot and dense (like the central core of a star)."

"Plasma consists of a collection of free moving electrons and ions - atoms that have lost electrons."

Artist sketch of dynamic sun, solar wind and earth's space plasma environment

the earth's magnetosphere protects it

From Science.nasa.gov: "A magnetosphere is that area of space, around a planet, that is controlled by the planet's magnetic field. The shape of the Earth's magnetosphere is the direct result of being blasted by solar wind. It prevents most of the particles from the Sun, carried in the solar wind, from hitting the Earth. The Sun and other planets have magnetospheres, but the Earth has the strongest one of all the rocky planets. The Earth's magnetosphere is a highly dynamic structure that responds dramatically to solar variations. Life on Earth developed and is sustained under the protection of this variable magnetosphere."

Aurora Borialis from space - pic from the Technonaut

The Aurora Borialis "actually the result of collisions between gaseous particles in the Earth's atmosphere with charged particles released from the sun's atmosphere. Variations in colour are due to the type of gas particles that are colliding. The most common auroral color, a pale yellowish-green, is produced by oxygen molecules located about 60 miles above the earth. Rare, all-red auroras are produced by high-altitude oxygen, at heights of up to 200 miles. Nitrogen produces blue or purplish-red aurora.

The connection between the Northern Lights and sunspot activity has been suspected since about 1880. "

From Absolute Astronomy "The flux (flow rate) of cosmic rays incident on the Earth’s upper atmosphere is modulated (varied) by two processes; the Sun’s solar wind and the Earth's magnetic field. The Solar wind is expanding magnetized plasma generated by the Sun, which has the effect of decelerating the incoming particles, as well as excluding some of the particles with energies below about 1 GeV. The amount of solar wind is not constant due to changes in solar activity, for instance over its regular eleven-year cycle. Hence the level of modulation varies in anticorrelation with solar activity. Also the Earth's magnetic field deflects some of the cosmic rays, giving rise to the observation that the intensity of cosmic radiation is dependent on latitude, longitude, and azimuth angle. The cosmic flux varies from eastern and western directions due to the polarity of the Earth's geomagnetic field and the positive charge dominance in primary cosmic rays. (This is called the "east-west effect"). The cosmic-ray intensity at the Equator is lower than at the poles as the geomagnetic cutoff value is greatest at the equator. This is because charged particles tend to move in the direction of field lines and not across them, so that they are concentrated in the polar regions (where field lines are closest together). This is the reason the auroras occur at the poles, since the field lines curve down towards the Earth’s surface there. Finally, the longitude dependence arises from the fact that the geomagnetic dipole axis is not parallel to the Earth's rotation axis."

Svenmarks Cosmic Ray Interaction Diagram

From Watts Up With That "Cosmic rays are energetic particles that originate in space and our sun and collide with particles as they zip through our atmosphere. While they come from all directions in space, and the origination of many of these cosmic rays is unknown, they has recently been shown that a larger percentage emanate from specific deep space sources. Cosmic rays were originally discovered because of the ionization they produce in our atmosphere."

cosmic rays... an interpretation

So what is all this about? New scientific results is what this is all about.  The CERN Experiment Confirms Cosmic Rays Influence Cloud Seeds.  


From WUWT "The worldwide network neutron monitors that have since been established gather data that have shown there is a correlation between periodic solar activity and the earthly neutron count."


"Ground-based neutron monitors detect variations in the approximately 500 Mev to 20 GeV portion of the primary cosmic ray spectrum."


"The primary cosmic ray particles interact with the atmosphere and generate secondaries, some of which will reach the surface of the Earth."


So what does the CERN study reveal?  From WUWT "it appears that a non-visible light irradiance effect on Earth’s cloud seeds has been confirmed. The way it is posited to work is that the effect of cosmic rays (modulated by the sun’s magnetic variations which either allow more or deflect more cosmic rays) creates cloud condensation nuclei in the Earth’s atmosphere. With more condensation nuclei, more clouds form and vice-versa."


What does all this mean?  It means the global warmists’ dam breaks.

Nigel Calder explains in CERN experiment confirms cosmic ray action "Long-anticipated results of the CLOUD experiment at CERN in Geneva appear in tomorrow’s issue of the journal Nature (25 August). The Director General of CERN stirred controversy last month, by saying that the CLOUD team’s report should be politically correct about climate change. The implication was that they should on no account endorse the Danish heresy – Henrik Svensmark’s hypothesis that most of the global warming of the 20th Century can be explained by the reduction in cosmic rays due to livelier solar activity, resulting in less low cloud cover and warmer surface temperatures."

"Jasper Kirkby of CERN and his 62 co-authors, from 17 institutes in Europe and the USA, announce big effects of pions from an accelerator, which simulate the cosmic rays and ionize the air in the experimental chamber. The pions strongly promote the formation of clusters of sulphuric acid and water molecules – aerosols of the kind that may grow into cloud condensation nuclei on which cloud droplets form. What’s more, there’s a very important clarification of the chemistry involved."

“It’s the Sun, stupid!” The story isn’t really about a bunch of naughty Danish physicists. They are just spokesmen for the most luminous agent of climate change. As the Sun was what the warmists really wanted to tame with their dam, they couldn’t do it. And coming to the Danes’ aid, by briefly blasting away many cosmic rays with great puffs of gas, the Sun enabled the team to trace in detail the consequent reduction in cloud seeding and liquid water in clouds.

By the way, that research also disposes of a morsel of doubt in the new CLOUD paper, about whether the small specks made by cosmic rays really grow sufficiently to seed cloud droplets.

As knowledge accumulated behind their dam and threatened to overtop it, the warmists had one last course to lay. Paradoxically it was CLOUD. Long delays with this experiment to explore the microchemical mechanism of the Svensmark effect became the chief excuse for deferring any re-evaluation of the Sun’s role in climate change. When the microchemical mechanism was revealed prematurely by the SKY experiment in Copenhagen and published in 2006, the warmists said, “No particle accelerator? That won’t do! Wait for CLOUD.”

When the experiment in Aarhus confirmed the mechanism using a particle accelerator they said, “Oh that’s just the Danes again! Wait for CLOUD."

Well they’ve waited and their dam has failed them."   

LET THE WATER OF TRUTH FLOW ... & destroy the AGW warmist religion of lies!

The Western Free Press says AGW is under attack by cosmic rays - a simple explanation: "Solar activity modulates the incidence of Cosmic Rays on Earth, and the Cosmic Rays affect cloud formation by providing more condensation nuclei on which water droplets grow. More clouds mean more reflected sunlight and a cooler earth." 

Possible cosmic ray aerosol link explained - image from Physics World

Bishop Hill points out Physics World acknowledges "Henrik Svensmark of the National Space Institute in Copenhagen and colleagues hypothesize that the ions that are formed as (charged) cosmic rays pass through the atmosphere act as a kind of glue that makes it easier for molecules to stick together and form aerosols. This hypothesis has proved controversial* because it suggests a role for solar variation, as well as human emissions of greenhouse gases, in climate change – the idea being that the stronger the Sun's magnetic field, the more cosmic rays are deflected away from the Earth, resulting in the formation of fewer clouds and so a warmer Earth, with a weaker solar magnetism having the opposite effect."   (*why is that controversial?  ASK AL GORACLE...)

CERN says 'Climate models will need to be substantially revised'.  Well who is CERN anyway?  

"CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, is one of the world’s largest and most respected centres for scientific research. Its business is fundamental physics, finding out what the Universe is made of and how it works. At CERN, the world’s largest and most complex scientific instruments are used to study the basic constituents of matter — the fundamental particles. By studying what happens when these particles collide, physicists learn about the laws of Nature.

The instruments used at CERN are particle accelerators and detectors. Accelerators boost beams of particles to high energies before they are made to collide with each other or with stationary targets. Detectors observe and record the results of these collisions.

Founded in 1954, the CERN Laboratory sits astride the Franco–Swiss border near Geneva. It was one of Europe’s first joint ventures and now has 20 Member States."

From CERN's press release Geneva, 25 August 2011 the CLOUD experiment provides unprecedented insight into cloud formation "In a paper published in the journal Nature today, the CLOUD1 experiment at CERN2 has reported its first results. The CLOUD experiment has been designed to study the effect of cosmic rays on the formation of atmospheric aerosols - tiny liquid or solid particles suspended in the atmosphere - under controlled laboratory conditions. Atmospheric aerosols are thought to be responsible for a large fraction of the seeds that form cloud droplets. Understanding the process of aerosol formation is therefore important for understanding the climate.

The CLOUD results show that trace vapours assumed until now to account for aerosol formation in the lower atmosphere can explain only a tiny fraction of the observed atmospheric aerosol production. The results also show that ionisation from cosmic rays significantly enhances aerosol formation. Precise measurements such as these are important in achieving a quantitative understanding of cloud formation, and will contribute to a better assessment of the effects of clouds in climate models."

With real scientific results, I agree with the Western Free Press who point out
"...many scientists have been saying that there is more evidence for the sun’s role in climate change than for humans’ role." ...  I agree and say emphatically - DUH!

NZ CSC finds no correlation between CO2 and climate

hey, psssst, New Zealand...  you've been LIED TO regarding "man made" global warming...!

From the NZ Climate Science Coalition:  "COALITION CHALLENGE TO NIWA ON ACCURACY OF AMENDED TEMPERATURE RECORDS - 7 August 2011"

 "In the hope of avoiding the alternative of action in the High Court, the Coalition has invited the chairman of NIWA to review the accuracy of its recent amendments to the Seven Station Record that it uses as Nerw Zealand's official temperature record. The Coalition's request is prompted by its own peer-reviewed audit which shows virtually no warming over the period cited by NIWA."

Picture above from NZ CSC: "Table 5 shows New Zealand’s historical average temperatures since the instrumental record began, divided by decade. The first group is coloured according to mean warmth, with the warmest in red and the coolest in blue. The second group is coloured according to warming trend.

Note that there has been no really significant trend since the 1950s, and that there has been a cooling trend since the turn of the century.

All New Zealand temperature trends have been modest, short-lived and unpredictable. They change constantly in both sign and amplitude, displaying no discernible pattern. Clearly, they are not responding to any linear or progressive external forcing (See Table 5 from the NZCSC Report)"

More from NZ CSC media release. Click here to get the full document.

"Emissions Don’t Raise NZ Temperatures - No correlation here between CO2 and climate"

"New Zealand temperatures were flat during the 20th century and have been declining during the 21st century.

This claim is made in two papers released today by the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition.

“For almost 20 years, successive New Zealand Governments have been officially advised that domestic temperatures had risen sharply over the past 100 years, reflecting increases in atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide” said Barry Brill, chairman of the Coalition. “We now show that this advice was plainly wrong.”

So who cares if New Zealand has basically had NO warming trend over the last century?  Well NZ should care - the NZ government is TAXING you (with the ETS) to prevent man made warming effects which don't even exist!  Why does the NZ governement lie?  For money and power of course -  paid for by government "consensus".

What to do then?  Nothing.  Just prepare for emergencies and adapt. 

See recent interview of Lord Monckton by NZ's TV3 6-Aug-11.  

From the Heartland Institute's International Conference on Climate Change.  The topic for the recent 6th annual conference Jun30- Jul1 2011 was "Restoring the Scientific Method".

"Global Warming Is Not a Crisis"

"But global warming is not, in fact, a crisis. Here’s how we know this:

• Since 2007, more than 31,072 American scientists, including 9,021 with Ph.Ds, have signed the a petition which says, in part, “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”
• A 2003 international survey of climate scientists (with 530 responding) found only 9.4 percent “strongly agreed” and 25.3 percent “agreed” with the statement “climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes.” Some 10.2 percent “strongly disagreed.”
• A 2006 survey of scientists in the U.S. found 41 percent disagreed that the planet’s recent warmth “can be, in large part, attributed to human activity,” and 71 percent disagreed that recent hurricane activity is significantly attributable to human activity.
• A recent review of 1,117 abstracts of scientific journal articles on “global climate change” found only 13 (1 percent) explicitly endorse the “consensus view” while 34 reject or cast doubt on the view that human activity has been the main driver of warming over the past 50 years.
• In June 2009, the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) released an 880-page report, titled Climate Change Reconsidered, that presented the first comprehensive rebuttal of the reports of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). With contributions from more than 30 scientists and citations to more than 4,000 peer-reviewed studies, the NIPCC report concluded that climate change is not a crisis.

The mainstream of the scientific community, in other words, does not believe global warming is a crisis."
Go watch some videos of the Heartland Conference 6th annual convention speakers.  Start with Bob Carter ... and remember the black swan.

NZ tries mightily to avoid Lord Monckton's AGW truth

DOES SCARING THE PUBLIC TO BELIEVE IN AGW STILL WORK ?? image from Carbon Sense

Apparently the nz show "CloseUp" was going to have Lord Monckton on but they canceled.  Stuff reports he speaks without peers but they are just afraid of the truth he discusses. Climate Conversation NZ advises:

"Television stations pull out

The major television shows Q&Q and Closeup, after asking to interview Lord Monckton, have pulled out, citing the Green Party’s change of heart and claiming no “opponent” could be found.

Why they need an opponent I cannot imagine. They manage to interview most people without wheeling in an opponent.

This will result in diminished public understanding, because most people would hear about Monckton’s contrary views only when the mainstream media carry them."

Lord Monckton was on Leighton Smith's NZtalkZB show yesterday and I caught a lot of it. It was a great show. Andy provides a link to Monckton on Newstalk ZB:

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/thisweek/hourrecs/Thu,%20Aug%204%2010.00%20trn-newstalk-zb-akl.asf

Starts at 20 mins into the audio

I'm still looking for any video from yesterday's debate and will post if I can find it.  Here is a 3-Aug interview from "unrealalexjones" on youtube:

Lord Monckton to visit NZ in Aug after Australian speaking tour ends

from F.Swempson at AT

iOwnTheWorld and American Thinker reminds us about the (man made!) global warming hoax - we shouldn't forget about it...  F.Swempson at AT says:

"While Americans are rightfully focused on the unemployment situation and the debt limit negotiations, we've pretty much forgotten about global warming as an issue ever since Obama failed to pass his Cap & Trade bill. As a result, we're becoming complacent once again about the huge threat we face from the progressives' attempts to control the world's energy industry based on the greatest scientific hoax in human history. In reality, however, nothing's changed, as Obama is still imposing his will on us through the EPA's regulation of CO2.

This hoax still threatens our economy, while advancing the UN's "Agenda 21" in more ways than one. It's also the foundation of Obama's "green jobs" approach to the unemployment issue, since the very concept of "green jobs" is just as bogus as the idea of a "carbon footprint."

With Fox anchors and conservative bloggers arguing that those "green" jobs are simply far too few to fuel a strong recovery, the fact that they're based on junk science, and aren't economically viable on their own, gets little if any mention.

The truth is that CO2 is a beneficial trace gas that exists in such small quantities in our atmosphere, that the idea of it playing any significant role in determining our climate is simply silly. CO2 comprises less than half of 0.1% of our atmosphere, and only 4% of it comes from human activity. That's 16ppm, or 1 part in every 62,500 parts of our atmosphere. CO2 is plant food, and a key component in all life on earth. Plants need CO2 to grow and produce oxygen. They feed animals (including ourselves). Animals in turn consume oxygen and plant-based foods, and exhale CO2. Without CO2, nothing could be green!"

CARBON DIOXIDE IS NOT A "POLLUTANT" AND DOES NOT CAUSE WARMING!

In Australia, Lord Christopher Monckton recently debated Dr. Richard Denniss on climate change at the Australian National Press club:  did you hear about it?  JoNova links to the debate.  It is an hour, but it is quite good.

From Australian Andrew Bolt's blog, Bolt rates the National Press Club debate’s results as:
Lord Monckton - 10
Former Greens adviser Richard Denniss - 1
Journalists - 0.

From a commenter on Bolt's blog: "Monckton was a breath of fresh air to listen to. He certainly knows his subject and won hands down against that pathetic Government lacky. He put the reporters that asked stupid questions back in their box, and the last reporter to ask a question looked terrified. You can see now why the left is trying to stifle debate as their argument has too many holes as Monckton pointed out..."

NZ's Climate Conversation mentions Lord Monckton to visit NZ after his Australian speaking tour. That is very cool!  NZ has already enacted a carbon tax - its called the ETS.  Food and petrol prices have risen because of it.  Does NZ's ETS actually impact or help abate any man made global climate "warming"?  Nope.  Not one iota!  I sincerely hope NZ will LISTEN to Lord Monckton.

From Climate Realists:

Auckland- Thursday 4th August
10am-11.30am NewstalkZB with Leighton Smith
12.15pm -2pm Business lunch- Northern Club
Lunch with Lord Monckton

Global climate change is seen by many as the world's biggest threat. But is it real … or are we subjects to bureaucratically manipulated groupthink? How has the science behind climate change been formulated and communicated?

Leading climate change skeptic Viscount Christopher Monckton - hereditary British peer, journalist, businessman and entertaining public speaker - says:

• Global temperature change is well within natural historical cycles.
• The so-called spate of extreme weather is a myth: there were more cyclones in the 1800s than today.
• Consensus (of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] scientists) does not make climate change true.
• If you choose your time-frame carefully you can make any trend look as if it is increasing or decreasing.
• Al Gore's movie 'An Inconvenient Truth' is riddled with inconvenient errors.

Lord Monckton will explain why carbon dioxide is beneficial to Earth and mankind, and is not a "pollutant", that emissions, mainly natural, cannot and will not adversely affect natural rises and falls in global temperature that have occurred through the centuries. Any attempts by humans to "control" the temperature of the Earth cannot succeed, and the imposition of charges such as our ETS tax are pain without any possible gain. After his address, Lord Monckton will welcome questions from the audience.

venue: The Northern Club, 19 Princes St, Auckland
time: 12.15 for 12.30 start
cost: Members $38.50 non-members $48.00 (includes a 2 course lunch with wine)
contact: non-members email info@climaterealists.org.nz to book

And have you heard Australia's prime minister's favorable rating has gone down to 26% ("nobody's  listening to Gillard any more") as she pushes her scheme to enact a carbon tax on Australian citizens? Time will tell if Australians will stand for this greenie-communist agenda...  C'mon ozzies, fight it!

Less than 1 human hair's worth of Australian pollution a "huge" problem?

Gateway Bridge, Brisbane Australia

I receive the below analogy in an email.  Read and can you explain to me how do people still believe in AGW and think CO2 is a "huge problem"?  Can anyone explain it beyond it being just a religious belief of untruths promulgated by the UN?


"Read the following analogy and you will realize the insignificance of carbon dioxide as a weather controller.


Imagine 1 kilometer of Atmosphere and we want to get rid of the carbon pollution in it being created by human activity.


Let's go for a walk along this 1 Kilometer of Atmosphere together.


One Kilometer consists of 1000 Meters


The first 770 meters are Nitrogen.


The next 210 meters are Oxygen.


This Totals 980 meters of the 1 kilometer: 20 meters to go.


The next 10 meters are water vapor: 10 meters left.


9 meters of the remaining 10 are Argon: Just 1 more meter left.


Now a few different gases make up the first bit of this last meter.


Still looking for the Carbon Dioxide.


Well it makes up the last 38 centimeters of the kilometer.


97% of this is produced by Mother Nature itself.


Yes, It's natural.


Out of our journey of one kilometer, just 12 millimeters left.


Just over a centimeter - about half of one inch.


This is the approximate amount of carbon dioxide global human activity puts into the Worlds atmosphere.


Australia's portion of this 12 millimeters is .18 -  less than the thickness of a human hair. " 


Currently as in right NOW, Australia's prime minister is trying to convince her country the "pollution" of a human hair - say laid on a brand new 1 kilometer long bridge - is a "huge problem"...  Can you see how silly that is?  Can you see how silly it is to enact a carbon tax to combat the "huge problem" of a hair's width (less than) of "pollution" on a new kilometer long bridge?  


You can see the silliness... from across the world.  


Wake up Australia and say NO to a carbon tax. There is NO "huge problem" except for the leaders Australians are allowing to lead them around by the nose with their globalist lies with no other purpose than to extract more money from hard working tax paying citizens.

JUST 1 STRAND OF HAIR IS NOT "POLLUTION" AUSTRALIA !!

UK's Delingpole and over 4 thousand comments

James Delinpole is an excellent writer over at the UK's Telegraph.  His recent article Frogs, scorpions, greens, lies is pretty good.  Snippet about the lies and spin by AGW warmists:

"Why? It’s a “why” that applies equally well to almost everything to do with the modern environmental movement. Why, if the science is so “settled” and the case for putting the global economy on a war footing to “combat climate change” so strong, do they keep needing to tweak and exaggerate their message?   Why, as Greenpeace’s former head Gerd Leipold once famously excused  his organisation when it was caught out telling porkie pies on the extent of the Greenland ice sheet melt, do they have to“emotionalise the issue”? After all, surely if the issue is really what they say it is it wouldn’t need “emotionalising” with spin and lies and exaggeration and disingenuous camera footage: it would be plain for all to see and we’d all do something about it."  Read the rest here.  


In his Frogs commentary, Delingpole notes "Phelim McAleer co-author – with Ann McElhinney – of the Not Evil Just Wrong documentary debunking CAGW." Phelim and Ann are activists you should know about and pay attention to.

But a recent post from Mr. Delingpole's really ruffled some feathers with over 4000 comments!  


From the title alone, you might guess whose hackles were raised "The science is settled: US liberals really are the dumbest creatures on the planet" ... think that conclusion might anger some? Well, sorry, the truth hurts sometimes doesn't it, lefties.  James asks "why it is that liberal-lefties manage to be so utterly wrong about everything.  “Because they’re stupid,” said a libertarian friend of mine.

“Oh come on, not all of them surely? A bit misguided, maybe but…” I protested.

“No really they’re stupid because they’re not interested in facts. They just want to construct their pretty little narrative about the world, regardless of whether or not it has any bearing on reality. And then they want to dump it on us. And ruin our lives. So not just stupid but evil too.” HA HA ha James... no wonder you have 4000 comments!  You've probably ruined a few rainbows and unicorn summits with this kind of truthful writing.  

Keep it up, mate.

thoughts on a deep orange volcanic ash sunrise

I was recently in the Christchurch area for a weekend.  We flew down to pick up our new Basenji Kiki in Pleasant Point and we stayed overnight at our friend's house in Waimate.  It is the middle of winter down here in NZ and temperatures on the south island of New Zealand was noticeably cooler.  I wore a cotton sweatshirt, a rain coat and a scarf.  This garb was not sufficient and I was dang chilly.  

Sunrise on Sunday morning Jun 12th was clear and gorgeous.  Check out the colors!  The high atmosphere near NZ had some ash content all the way from across the globe from a Chilean volcano blast June 4, 2011.  I've read this week some scientists who track and observe sun spot activity are worried declining sun spot activity will mean cooling earth temperatures.  More evidence man has NO impact on global warming or global cooling?  What will the warmists do... their religion is based on falsified data and unproved theories. Will they ever grasp reality?  The beautiful blue planet we live on for a few years dishes out warmth, cold, snow, vocanoes, tornadoes, earthquakes, hurricanes ... and man still survives.  Man adapts.  Man does not impact global temperatures.  Man has a general idea of what tomorrow's local weather will be but is never very accurate and in fact is wrong a lot.  The AGW believers are just that - holding on to a religious belief their actions impact global weather patterns.  Explain to me in a coherent factual argument exactly how paying higher taxes will prevent the next Chilean volcanic blast caused by lava pressure and shifts deep in the earth's mantle?

I'll sip on a cup of lovely NZ cafe mocha... or maybe just a hot chocolate.  I'll remain happy I'm not living directly in a natural disaster area - like the continual earthquake zone in Christchurch or directly in the path of volcanic ash.  I'll hope the 50 something dormant Auckland volcanoes remain dormant.  I'll live my small life the best I can and talk about truth.  Lies like AGW hold no interest to me unless it is to expose them as lies. Life has ups, downs but is very short... enjoy it while you're here.  Find the truth and live lie free.

No AGW & USA has more oil reserves than Middle East

CONFIRMED FACT: in the past 15 years NO planetary "global warming" has occurred while at the same time CO2 levels increased 26%. AGW has been PROVEN false. CO2 is just plant food.

Excellent summary from last year by Dr. Terry Lovell:



"1. CO2 is good not bad. Greenhouse gases are mostly water.
2. Climate can't be measured, it's a state, not a quantity.
3. "Climate Science" is in its infancy, and atmospheric modeling that can predict changes in the weather or climate more than about a day or two in advance does not exist.
4. The EPA government website bases their scientific "facts" on information from the IPCC, which has been proven false and doctored. (Climategate)
No science exists proving man has any significant effect on global warming or climate change.
5. Many factors influence climate, the least of which is man."

This post today has been inspired by WND and a great post by Victoria Jackson.

It is time to RESIST the Green Dragon.

From this Christian based site "a biblical response to one of the greatest deceptions of our day": Environmentalism
"Without a doubt one of the greatest threats to society and the church today is the multifaceted environmental movement. Although its reach is often subtle, there isn't an aspect of life that it doesn't seek to force into its own mold.

Environmentalism has become a new religion.
Environmentalism's policies are devastating to world's poor.
Environmentalism threatens the sanctity of life.
Environmentalism is targeting our youth.
Environmentalism's vision is global."

Will you resist?

...And since AGW has been proved FALSE, it IS time to DRILL IN AMERICA and DRILL NOW... So which Republican could POSSIBLY enact these types of policy in the USA come 2012 and why do you think the left is scared of her? Palin is absolutely correct on energy and the credentials more than any other possible candidate. Let's hope she runs dang it...