Save the Humans

Hide the Decline

You have to enjoy this!

Climategate Invisible

It's pretty hard to get me interested in conspiracy theories, but this one has me. I certainly don't believe in global warming, the whole thing has never run true and the ludicrous headlines like "Climate change 'could kill 400,000 children every year'" don't help.

It amazes me that the BBC has not picked this up, and that it can get away with not mentioning Climategate. Try this google search: - only 5 matches, no mention at all in a story, only in comments:

climategate site:news.bbc.co.uk

"After daring to mention climategate, I hope the thought police there at the Ministry of Truth are going to leave Michael's mind in tact for the next show."

Then see the BBC's 'science & environment' page (an Orwellian attempt to bring these two together). All they have is:

Inquiry into stolen climate e-mails
Past climate anomalies explained

The BBC has apparently told people to avoid giving sceptics any air time, according to a long time newsreader - also see this:

He said: "The Corporation's most famous interrogators invariably begin by accepting that "the science is settled", when there are countless reputable scientists and climatologists producing work that says it isn't.

"But it is effectively BBC policy... that those views should not be heard."

In comparison the Sunday Times devoted a whole page and a bit to it, as did Sat Telegraph (see my previous entry).

Or try searching for 'climategate' at The Guardian:

George Monbiot, a long term global warming campaigner who writes the for Guardian, called for the resignation of Phil Jones.

But note the subbie line "Climate sceptics have lied, obscured and cheated for years. That's why we climate rationalists must uphold the highest standards of science". He also calls non-believers 'scumbags', accuses them of 'outright fabrication, fraud and deceit', and says that they have mounted a grotesque campaign of lies. He also wrote a book called "Heat: How We Can Stop the Planet Burning"

I did a straw poll of people at my table at the pub other other night - all think global warming is rubbish, or at least wildly overdone. I make a point of asking people - I note that those who do believe in global warming get very upset at any indication that I might not be a believer. Reminds me of a few religions I know.

Google's top result under 'climategate' is currently this, a nice summary of the email issues: manipulation of evidence, private doubts about whether the world really is heating up, suppression of evidence, fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists, attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP)

Meanwhile, in our 'Only in the UK' category, we have this story:

GPs 'should offer climate change advice to patients'

Their controversial plan would see GPs and nurses give out advice to their patients on how to lower their carbon footprint.

The Council believes that climate change “threatens to radically undermine the health of all peoples”.

The only positive thing is that it is generally impossible to actually see your GP in the UK (since there is no charge), so the brainwashing effect of this will be minimal.

Environmentalists and the ETS

The environmentalists are not thrilled with the ETS. Good. But they are not unhappy enough for my liking. We can only truly be comfortable when the environmentalists are screaming bloody murder and assuring us that the world is about to end.

Academic environmentalists are rather less happy, which is promising. For example the environmentalists at Hot Topic quote a few comments. They are from 'scientists' by the way, not dodgy environmentalist academics, just in case you wondered.

The passing of today’s Climate Change Response amendment bill through the House is deeply disappointing. Every week, emerging climate science underlines the need for urgent action to cut emissions drastically, with developed countries especially needing to make cuts right now to avoid a global warming drift above 2 degrees, the guardrail against dangerous change.

Developed countries especially? Is their CO2 a different colour perhaps? Every week? Surely this man is an environmentalist first, scientist second. As for 2 degrees, temperatures have not risen at all in the last 10 years. What is he talking about?

We have the low-carbon technology –- which include many forms of renewable energy such as solar electric, solar thermal, wind, wave, tidal, geothermal and bio-energy. All we need to do is scale these technologies up rapidly and harvest the economies of scale.”

I have a box of matches. All we need to do is scale it up this technology and we can all be warm.

ETS Madness

Well it's all happening in global warming world. The NZ government has passed its ETS legislation (a watered-down version of Labour's effort) which by its own admission will:

• Increase household electricity by 5%
• Increase petrol price by 3.5c/l
• Create lots of compliance costs

Nicky Wagner, a Christchurch MP who seems to believe strongly in global warming, has sent out a confused email entitled 'Protecting our Economy and Environment'. It states in part:

Climate change is our biggest environmental challenge. How we respond to it now will determine the future shape of our economy, environment, and communities.

Many would argue that water, or the need to mine as much coal as possible as soon as possible, are greater environmental challenges.

Our driving ambition has been to significantly reduce the cost of the previous government’s Emissions Trading Scheme for Kiwi households.

If that were the case the legislation would simply have been repealed. In fact the driving ambition has been to work out some sort of compromise between the environmentalists and the rest of New Zealand. Why anyone would want to negotiate with an environmentalist is beyond me. It's a little like negotiating with terrorists about how many innocent people they can murder each year.

National has delivered on our election promises and struck the right balance between our economic opportunities and our environmental responsibilities. We’ve made the scheme more workable for businesses, and halved the cost to families in our communities.

Given that global warming is a scan, there are no responsibilities to reduce CO2 emissions. All of this hot air is just a conspiracy to reduce plant growth. It is a pointless cost and regulation increase.

This Government is looking for pragmatic, practical ways to address climate change. As a trading nation, we cannot afford to get our response wrong. Our two biggest industries are agriculture and tourism and both rely on our "clean green image".

An obvious way to address climate change, such as it is, is to live with it. It is absurd to believe that we can dial up the temperature we want on Earth. The fact that there has been no warming for 10 shares is proof enough that it is a scam. We can always do something in 10 years if the temperature starts increasing again, or something better than a directed computer model appears to confirm the fully funded fears of the environmental lobby.

Our changes to the Emissions Trading Scheme ensure that Kiwis will be doing their fair share, while protecting our economy and our beautiful natural environment.

Taking these in reverse order...The ETS does nothing for our beautiful natural environment, which after all largely depends on CO2 for its existence. It does not protect but in fact actively harms our economy. And finally there is no clear idea what our 'fair share' of this international farce really is.

The ETS is a terrible mistake from a government which has been captured by environmentalists and doesn't know what is it talking about.