Professor Plimer Answers, MISSING Document,as exposed by Brian Wilshire on his top rating radio show 2GB 873,Sydney Australia

I found this pioneering anti Climate SCAM Documentary among my files and thought it was time to repost it.

We need to keep and distribute hard copies of the former Dep't of Climate Change .pdf (attached) ~ they've recently taken their old website down. All attempts to reach it via the Wayback Machine at www.archive.org result in a re-direction to the current “Dep’t of the Environment” site.
The document was an attempt to answer points made in Ian Plimer's book, "How to Get Expelled from School".Page 32 has the heat/C02 revelation: they admit that, for the last 800,000 years, heating events have preceded increases in the atmosphere's C02 levels, and therefore could not have been caused by C02. No wonder tricky Al Gore separated the two Vostok Ice Core graphs by several metres in his Inconvenient Truth doco.
They've destroyed the historical foundation of their global warming theory. We have them on the run.

Please share.

Prof Plimer Answers

A room full of eco-idiots...........Shell finally notices something odd

A room full of eco-idiots

Tony Thomas
The Daily Telegraph
December 19,2013

IT must be a tipping point in the climate debate when a senior Shell executive notices something odd about the green activists with whom he has been consorting.

David Hone, Shell UK's Melbourne-born "senior climate change adviser", went to an academic conference on "radical emission reduction strategies" in London on December 10-11.

He concluded that he had fallen among eco-idiots wanting to remould society from the ground up.

Hone, also a director of the Emissions Trading Association, has a background in oil- and shipping-trade markets. One explanation for his blog outburst could be that he was still in shock from the collapse of carbon pricing and trading schemes at the Warsaw IPCC conference. Hone wrote: "This was a room of catastrophists (as in 'catastrophic global warming'), with the prevailing view, at least to my ears, that the issue could only be addressed by the complete transformation of the global energy and political systems, with the latter moving to one of state control and regulated consumerism. There would be no room for 'ruthless individualism' in such a world. The posters that dotted the lecture theatre lobby area covered topics as diverse as vegan diets to an eventual return to low technology hunter-gatherer societies. Much to my surprise I was not really at an emission reduction conference (despite the label saying I was), but a political ideology conference."

The conference, sadly, was no less unhinged than the UK government's legally mandated goal to cut CO2 emissions by at least 80 per cent below 1990 levels by 2050. Stand by, hardy Britons, for brown and black-outs. Australian national targets are 5 per cent emission cuts by 2020, compared with 2000 levels.

UK climate blogger Andrew Montford noted: "Hone's sudden realisation that many of his fellow-travellers in the environmental movement are completely round the twist is rather comical and you can't help but wonder where he has been in the last 20 years."

At this loopy conference, Australia's ideas on climate catastrophism were well represented. One weblink paper was from Laurence Delina and Dr Mark Diesendorf, of the Institute of Environmental Studies, University of NSW. The title? "Is wartime mobilisation a suitable policy model for rapid national climate mitigation?" No wonder Shell's Hone felt trapped in a madhouse!

Our two experts in war-time mobilisations wrote: "Climate activists assert that rapid mitigation is feasible, invoking the scale and scope of wartime mobilisation strategies. This paper draws upon historical accounts of social, technological and economic restructurings in several countries during World War II in order to investigate potential applications of wartime experience to radical, rigorous and rapid climate mitigation strategies …We find that, while wartime experience suggests some potential strategies for rapid climate mitigation in the areas of finance and labour, it also has severe limitations, resulting from its lack of democratic processes. Furthermore, since restructuring the existing socio-economic system to mitigate climate change is more complex than fighting a war and since the threat of climate change is less obvious to non-scientists, it is unlikely the public will be unified in support of such executive action …"

Yep, that could be right.

Another participant was Professor John Wiseman, of Melbourne University's Sustainable Society Institute, whose weblink talk was titled, ''Winning the climate war: removing political roadblocks to radical emissions reductions''.

I particularly enjoyed a portrait of Professor Wiseman at an Australian conference last October, shown alongside a slide projection quoting excitable green activist Miriam Lyons: "The highest priority action for achieving a rapid transition to a just health and resilient post-carbon future is to sculpt visions of the future that are beautiful, and lifelike enough to fall in love with." (Needless to say, Ms Lyons is a regular guest on Radio National's Drive and Outsiders programs, along with ABC-TV's Q&A and The Drum).

Among Wiseman's authorships is ''Hope, Despair and Transformation: Climate Change and the Promotion of Mental Health and Wellbeing''. Hopefully the absence of global warming since 1997 has restored to sanity the victims of climate scare campaigns.

Another Aussie was Dr Jane O'Sullivan, of the University of Queensland, whose topic was, "Reducing emissions through family planning and women's empowerment." A gung-ho person on carbon taxes, Dr O'Sullivan shows symptoms of Life of Brian's People's Front of Judea divisiveness, being "frustrated by the tangled web of misconceptions and the determination of environmental activists to regard any criticism of the cap-and-trade proposal as climate change denial."

However, our Aussie presenters seem conservative compared to the Poms.

Typical of the green contingent was Pete Brace, an IT nerd and seven-year careerist in computer games, who wound up three years ago in a community called Tinkers Bubble which prohibits fossil fuels. His ambition is zero emissions plus a high quality of life. The whole show, including David Hone's epiphany, would be funny - except that taxpayers, including Australia's, must have funded 90 per cent of it.

Tony Thomas is a writer for Quadrant, where this piece first appeared.

Labor Green Loons maintain their RAGE against the Australian People via their CO2 Tax SCAM

Just Who IS Channel 9's "Firefighter" / angry ACTU Loon ?

Objectives of the FBEU

The objectives of the Fire Brigade Employees Union are prescribed by the Union’s registered rules and include:

furthering and protecting the interests of its members;

improving the working conditions and general welfare of its members;

improving the position of its members by increasing their proportionate share of the national wealth and by endeavouring to educate them towards the socialisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange;

upholding the rights of organised labour;

securing the election of working class representatives in Parliament and promoting such legislative enactments as will ensure industrial justice to the Australian working class;

advancing the efficiency of the services of fire prevention, suppression and extinguishment throughout the Commonwealth of Australia;

preserving and advancing civil liberties

to advance the cause of peace and friendship throughout the world.

Sydney Office

Hours: 8:00 – 17:00 weekdays.

1-7 Belmore St Surry Hills NSW 2010

Telephone: (02) 9218 3444

Fax: (02) 9218 3488

e-mail: office@fbeu.net

State Secretary

Jim Casey

Industrial Officers

Chris Read

George Maniatis

Gemma Lawrence

Stephen Spencer

Claire Pullen

Hugh Clouston

Marc Newman

Christine Donayre

Why Australia is Burning.......

Let's tell the burning truth about bushfires and the ALP-Greens coalition

Miranda Devine 
The Sunday Telegraph
January 13, 2013

WHENEVER a major bushfire catastrophe occurs in Australia, the victims are essentially told to shut up.

It happened after Victoria's Black Saturday fires in 2009. It happened after the Canberra bushfires, 10 years ago on Friday. And it's happening now in Tasmania.

"Now is not the time for that conversation," says the Tasmanian Minister for Emergency Management, David O'Byrne, avoiding questions about why adequate hazard reduction burns were not done in cooler months to remove fuel from the path of inevitable summer fires.

It's just too early, claims Premier Lara Giddings, presiding over Tasmania's ALP-Greens coalition.

But the residents of Dunalley, whose town was overrun, and the farmers whose properties and livestock have been wiped out, want that conversation right now.

Now is the time for farmers to complain that they could never get a permit to burn off excessive ground fuel on their properties.

Now, while public attention is focused, and before the truth can be buried for years.

Now is the time to point out, perhaps, that a fire which begins in a national park carrying negligently heavy loads of ground fuel can become an unstoppable inferno which will eventually burst out into the Canberra suburbs and kill four people and consume 500 homes.

Now is the time for people who understand the bush to tell the rest of Australia what fools we are.

"Fuel reduction burns make it possible to fight and control a fire; what happened here was uncontrollable," Dunalley farmer Leigh Arnold told The Australian.

Greenies who oppose such burnoffs, "care more about birds and wildlife than they do about people and farms," he said.

"But what's the point of that now when the hills and trees they told me I couldn't burn off, because there were protected eagles and swift parrots there, are now all burned and the fire it created was so hot we had dead swans dropping out of the sky?"

No, the only permissible comment on a bushfire catastrophe is to say it was caused by "climate change" - that convenient get-out-of-jail free card for greenies, governments and the obstructive bureaucracies they jointly create.

But we've heard it all before, and we're not buying it.

"It's really simple," says Brian Williams, captain of the Kurrajong Heights bushfire brigade, a veteran of 44 years of firefighting, in one of the most extreme fire risk areas of Australia, on a ridge surrounded by 0.75 million hectares of overgrown national park between the Blue Mountains and Wollemi.

"Fires run on fuel. Limited fuel means limited fire."

Green tape and heavy-handed bureaucracy has made his job harder today than in 28 years as captain. Rather than needing six people to perform a controlled burn in the cooler months, now 40 are involved, to oversee biodiversity and so on.

Williams managed to conduct just two of the five hazard reduction burns he planned before this fire season.

But don't blame greenies. All week they have been claiming they support hazard reduction. Really?

No matter what legalistic and linguistic ploys are now used to rewrite history, green hostility to proper bushfire management is on the record, from the light-green NIMBYs who object to smoke, to green lobbyists who infiltrate government decision-making, taxpayer-funded green activists who embed themselves in government agencies, the bureaucratic green tape which makes the job of volunteer firefighters so difficult, the green NGOs who strongarm politicians, right up to the political arm of green ideology, The Greens.

It is true The Greens have developed a new set of "aims" including a caveat-studded "effective and sustainable strategy for fuel-reduction management".

In practice, on the ground, it amounts to covert opposition. Williams scoffs at the Orwellian sophistry: "They publicly say they support it. The reality of how it pans out is nothing like that. Greens have two faces and underneath they are undermining everything."

While there have been improvements under a new state government, Williams says hazard reduction is still inadequate across NSW, reaching just 1 per cent rather than the 5 per cent minimum recommended by the Victorian bushfire inquiry.

At least in the hard-won patch of Volunteer Fire Fighter Association president Peter Cannon, around Dubbo, Parkes and Forbes, hazard reduction is complete this year and he is confident any fires will be controllable.

He says it is a credit to hard-working firefighters that Tasmania-scale destruction has not occurred in NSW despite extreme fire conditions.

Another bright spot is the latest Rural Fire Service annual report which says more than 80 per cent of planned hazard reduction was achieved, and the area treated should increase by 45 per cent over three years.

It's not enough but it's a welcome change from the dark days of 2003, eight months before the Canberra inferno, when former RFS Commissioner Phil Koperberg told a NSW parliamentary inquiry that widespread hazard reduction was "an exercise in futility".

Fast forward to last month and blame for that fire has finally been laid where it belongs, at the feet of Koperberg's RFS and the green-influenced National Parks and Wildlife Service.

Brinadabella farmer Wayne West, whose property was wiped out in the fires, sued the two agencies. Last month in the ACT Supreme Court, Chief Justice Terrence Higgins found them negligent.

The episode demonstrated how green pressure on decision-makers filters down into a cascade of subtle bureaucratic obstructions which disempower firefighters on the ground and disregard their expertise.

The result in 2003 was that a small fire at McIntyre's Hut in the Brindabella ranges was allowed to rage out of control through the national park to emerge 10 days later, and burn lethally through Canberra's suburbs.

Unfortunately for West and his insurance company, the government agencies are protected by statute and don't have to pay compensation.

But West won a moral victory. We all are in his debt because he fought for the truth and refused to shut up.

Bob Brown has it wrong - I do not advocate violence against greenies

Miranda Devine 
The Sunday Telegraph
January 13, 2013 12:00AM
  
I CAN'T say I was surprised when Bob Brown had a shot at me in The Sydney Morning Herald last week. Still, even though he is a Green, you'd think he'd have more integrity than to lie about me.

Bob Brown (l) and "Partner" Paul Thomas

In tepee dwelling eco-terrorist Jonathan Moylan, who admitted creating a false ANZ press release which briefly carved $340 million off the value of Whitehaven Coal, Bob likened the young man to himself. And Gandhi, Mandela, Martin Luther King and Jesus Christ.

Jonathan, like Bob, is Saving the Planet. "Business as usual in COALMINING is a high crime against humanity." The only real crime alleged here, is Moylan's.

Which brings us to me. Australian eco-activists are "committed to non-violence", Bob wrote. But no such commitment exists on "the other side".

"Just read Miranda Devine's advocacy of violence against environmentalists in The Daily Telegraph."

It's not true, Bob. I have never advocated violence.

Bob did try to get me sacked for a column I wrote in the Herald in 2009, a week after Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires killed 173 people.

It wasn't climate change or arsonists which killed those people, I wrote. "It was the unstoppable intensity of a bushfire, turbo-charged by huge quantities of ground fuel which had been allowed to accumulate over years of drought. It was the power of green ideology over government to oppose attempts to reduce fuel hazards before a megafire erupts, and which prevents landholders from clearing vegetation to protect themselves.

"So many people need not have died so horribly. The warnings have been there for a decade. If politicians are intent on whipping up a lynch mob to divert attention from their own culpability, it is not arsonists who should be hanging from lamp-posts but greenies."

At the time, a lynch mob against arsonists was being egged on by politicians and the media. When a "fragile loner" was charged with arson, vigilantes called for him to be burned at the stake.

No reasonable person would have read my column as advocating violence, or hanging greenies from lamp-posts. Of 330 responses, not one reader mentioned lamp-posts.

It took 10 days for Bob's misrepresentation to gain traction.

Four months later the Press Council dismissed the complaint brought by his supporters. Bob persists because shooting the messenger is his only answer.

Telling little Green lies makes a media darling

Tim Blair 
The Daily Telegraph 
January 14, 2013 12:00AM

Anti-coal activist Jonathan Moylan is admired by The Greens and some on the left. Source: The Daily Telegraph

A FEW days before the 2007 federal election, several Liberal Party members met in Penrith to carry out a dirty trick.

Led by Gary Clark, husband of retiring member for Lindsay Jackie Kelly, the group composed a bogus document claiming to be from "The Islamic Australia Foundation". The crudely manufactured work, complete with misspellings and outdated logos, indicated extremist Islamic support for the Labor party.

As they attempted to distribute copies of the slur in suburban letterboxes, the hoaxers were photographed by members of the ALP who'd been tipped off from within the Liberal Party. Media outrage, police charges and party expulsions followed.

Then prime minister John Howard, along with just about everybody from all sides of politics, slammed the dishonest tactic. "I have condemned it," said Howard. "I've dissociated myself from it. I think it's stupid, it's offensive, it's wrong, it's untrue."

Last week anti-coal activist Jonathan Moylan, who describes himself as a "Christian anarchist", attempted a similar stunt. He produced a press release claiming to be from the ANZ that announced the bank's withdrawal from funding a new coal mine. Contacted by journalists, Moylan presented himself as an ANZ representative.

Several media outlets, among them the Australian Financial Review, fell for the trick, which quickly led to Whitehaven Coal losing some $300 million in share value. Compared to the bungling Liberal gang of 2007, Moylan was rather more successful.

There's another significant difference between these otherwise similar incidents. Instead of being condemned for his lies, 24-year-old Moylan has become a hero to the Greens and many others on the left, who now endorse outright fraud as a legitimate political device.

Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon took to Twitter one day after Moylan's scam: "Congrats to Jonathan Moylan, Frontline Action on Coal, for exposing ANZ investment in coalmines."

Greens leader Christine Milne said that Moylan's lies were "part of a long and proud history of civil disobedience, potentially breaking the law, to highlight something wrong". Former Greens candidate Clive Hamilton: "Often those who engage in civil disobedience are otherwise the most law-abiding citizens. They are those who have most regard for the social interest and the keenest understanding of the democratic process."

Ex-Greens leader Bob Brown topped them all. "History is full of this," wrote the great earthian, who is full of something himself.

"Gandhi and Mandela went to jail. Martin Luther King was assassinated. Jesus Christ turned up at the businessmen's tables and look what happened to him. Anti-slavery campaigner John Brown's 'body lies mouldering in the grave' and suffragette Emily Davidson was killed when she ran in front of the horses at the 1913 Epsom Derby." All it takes to become a modern Jesus/Gandhi/Mandela for the Greens is one fake press release. The martyr bar isn't set very high these days.

Naturally, the ABC also leapt to Moylan's defence. Here's the opening paragraph from an ABC piece published last Thursday: "The activist who caused a $314 million temporary plunge in Whitehaven Coal's share price could face 10 years in jail, despite having no intention of personally profiting from his fake press release."

Note the concluding excuse-making sentence, which - as some web commentators observed - the ABC really ought to include in other reports. For example: "The arsonists who caused widespread destruction could face years in prison, despite having no intention of personally profiting from their fires."

If lack of a profit motive mitigates against jail sentences, a great many rapists and murderers are currently imprisoned unjustly.

Fairfax, too, were hot for Moylan. "If letters pages and social media are any indication, there is widespread support for Moylan's hoax," wrote academic Katherine Wilson. "To charge him with a criminal offence would be utterly immoral."

So, now that we've all moved on from 2007 and are now accepting lies for political causes, I've been having some online fun myself by whipping up a few bogus Greens press releases. It's only fair, seeing as they so strongly endorse this kind of thing.

Creating these mock media statements is a simple matter of photoshopping new words into the Greens' media announcement website. So far they've called for a minute's silence in parliament to honour the memory of "intergeneration intimacy pioneer" Dennis Ferguson, demanded that asylum seekers be billeted throughout western suburban bedrooms and sought an increase in abortions to provide NVHP ("non-viable human protein") fuel for sustainable, coal-free power generators.

Some readers have fallen for the fake media statements, which I guess shows just how many AFR journalists are out there. Of course, Greens supporters aren't impressed. "Wow. Disgraceful," wrote one Twitter identity. "My God," gasped another.

Get used to it, babies. The Greens have set this standard. It's just "part of a long and proud history of civil disobedience". And, just to reassure the ABC, no profit motive is involved.

Wind Farms, Labor Green Loons Monuments to Climate Insanity

Building a monument to climate insanity

TERRY MCCRANN

The Daily Telegraph

October 31,2013

Pg.60

I STILL have a dream. Of that one day when we start pulling down the utterly useless, landscape-blighting, bird-killing, people-punishing wind farms.

We’ll leave a few, some stripped of their turbines, some left with a blade to turn lazily and even more uselessly in the occasional breeze; all, like fragments of the Berlin Wall, as a reminder of the time when insanity engulfed the intellectual and policy making elites.
The Climate Change Authority’s 177 pages of sheer drivel, released yesterday, comes close to ranking as the high-water mark of this insanity.

The authority was not content with just doubling down on the climate stupidity, it tripled down in its draft report.
Thanks to Julia Gillard and Bob Brown — endorsed so memorably by that in-chamber kiss from the squibber, Kevin Rudd — Australia is legally committed to cutting emissions of carbon dioxide by 5 per cent by 2020.
Well, the authority says we’ve got to shoot for at least 15 per cent; and it left little doubt that it really wants 25 per cent.

That’s hardly surprising given the troika of professorial climate hysterics, Clive Hamilton, David Karoly and John Quiggin, at the authority’s core. It’s surprising they didn’t persuade their fellow members to shoot for something more tangible — like closing down all our real power stations by 2020.

The authority’s central argument for bigger carbon dioxide emission cuts was that “evidence is also mounting’’ that several other comparable countries were preparing to reduce emissions even more aggressively by 2020.
This was followed by the usual “what will they think of us” bleat that a 5 per cent target would leave Australia lagging.

Greg Sheridan, in The Australian, shredded that claim two weeks ago, as far as action via an emissions trading scheme is concerned.
Of the 195 members in the UN Framework Convention on Climate, only 34 had anything resembling an ETS and 27 of those were in the European Union.
Japan had effectively abandoned its ETS plans, Sheridan wrote. South Korea had one but was going to issue all permits free. Some of the biggest emitters, like Indonesia and India, subsidised carbon fuels.

Yes, the US has an impressive target. But it does not have either a carbon tax or an ETS and never will.
But it comes back to the carbon elephant in the room: China, which buys a lot of coal and iron ore from us and turns that into steel, a little bit of power and a lot of carbon dioxide.
The report claimed China was trying harder to reduce emissions. And that it was “investing heavily in renewable energy projects, closing inefficient coal power plants’’.

The first is simply untrue. As the fine print notes, China aims to cut only carbon dioxide emission intensity — not emissions per se — by cutting emissions per unit of GDP by 40-45 per cent by 2020. That might sound impressive, but given China’s growth, its 2020 emissions will be significantly higher than today’s.
The other claim is a deliberate constructive lie. It is replacing old coal-fired power stations — to reduce real pollution, the dirty bits of grit that really do kill people — with modern plants that pump out as much carbon dioxide, cleanly.

The report proposes wilful pain on all Australians and serious damage to the economy. It could well have been written by Bob Brown and Christine Milne. It certainly channels all their fantasies.

Christine Milne

Environmental Scientist and Campaigner David Suzuki performs a bellyflop

Terry McCrann
Hearld Sun
September 25,2013 

Heating God, David Suziki

IMAGINE an economist, so respected, so informed, with such a seemingly razor-sharp mind - at least, that is, to the ABC - that the TV network bestows on them the privilege and exposure generally reserved only for prime ministers, opposition leaders and globally significant figures like Bill Gates.

That is, a full hour to be questioned, all on their own, to share their ABC-perceived wisdom and unique insights, on the ABC’s Q & A program. The first question to this economist asks him or her to comment on the significance for the economy of the government’s big budget deficits.

To elicit the response: what deficits? What is the source for your claim, that there’ve been deficits? To which the somewhat startled questioner might respond: well, the government’s official budget papers.

That is waved away by the esteemed economist with; I don’t know what some raving shock-jock has managed to calculate. Do you think a hopefully even slightly embarrassed Tony Jones would be forced to 'do a Kerry'. To abruptly terminate the program due to 'technical difficulties'. For if an economist literally didn’t know the budget in Australia has been in deficit in recent years, why on earth would you consider anything else she or he had to say, had the slightest value.

Well, exactly that happened, in real life - well, OK, ABC-life- on Q & A on Monday night. Canadian self-promoter and all-round blowhard, David Suzuki - albeit, described by the ABC as "Renowned Environmental Scientist and Campaigner" - had been given the full-hour.

In due deference to his secular sainthood, the program was titled: "An audience with David Suzuki". The first question up, asked him to comment on the pause in global warming since 1998.

"Yeah, well, I don’t know why you are saying that," was Suzuki’s response. When the questioner, explained that it was based on all the datasets that measured global temperatures, identifying them by name, Suzuki’s puzzled response was: "sorry, yeah, what is the reference?"

After they were spelt out; datasets that are recognised, accepted and used even by the UN’s climate campaigning IPCC; Suzuki again: "well, there may be a climate sceptic down in Huntsville, Alabama, who has taken the data and come to that conclusion".

At which point host Jones, should have interjected, that if Suzuki didn’t know that global temperatures had been broadly steady since 1998, what on earth was the point of continuing 'the audience'. Sure, we can have a discussion about why temperatures had been steady since 1998.

The IPPC, is going to do exactly, desperately. that in its big report that starts to be dribbled out tomorrow.

Desperate doesn’t even begin, incidentally, to describe the frightening position, that the IPCC and all the tens - nay, hundreds - of thousands of people around the world, who ride the great global warming gravy train, from one extravagant luxury conference to the next extravagant conference each year, face. For if the globe has stopped warming, how can you keep discussing, at great personal benefit and comfort, well,  "global warming.’’

Suzuki is himself a perfect example- charging $30,000 for one-hour speeches to university students. Plus $11,000 in 'expenses'. It’s a good thing he just does it "to save the planet".

Why, if he was after personal reward, he’d have to charge serious money. No wonder, he’s come out here; given almost unlimited access to wall-to-wall fawning, even ululating coverage on `your ABC.’ To warn against the threat posed by prime minister Abbott’s intent to abolish the  carbon tax poses to his wellbeing.

Err, that is to say, to his `well-being’ as a member of gaia, that is, of course. The timing of his visit, though, is exquisite, with the abolition of the Climate Commission, and the Suzukilike laughably fatuous claims made for it and its work. It’s now ex-chairman Tim Flannery - I wonder if he was envious to discover that Suzuki only had to give six speeches adding to all of six hours effort to pocket as much as the $180,00 he had been paid a year as chairman? - claimed the CC had "stuck to the facts."

That it had been the source of "authoritative, independent and accurate information on climate change".

Oh yeah, Tim, excuse me while I dry-retch. For all the CC has done is pour out global warming propaganda and hysterical overblown disaster nonsense. Under inflammatory, meaningless titles such as: "The Angry Summer." And report after report that included the words: the "Critical Decade." Designed to convey facts?

Designed to promote hysteria. Suzuki’s appearance on Monday night was exquisitely came straight after a classic, biased ABC Media Watch `Gotcha’ on some media misreporting on exactly the subject that floored Suzuki; the warming pause. In the normal pompous Media Watch way, leftist warmist believer Paul Barry was all over the trees - the fact that The Australian and Britain’s Daily Mail had overstated the fall in the pace of long-run global temperature rise. And completely missed the inconvenient wood.


That even the correct figure Barry pompously alluded to occurred as a consequence of the fact that global temperature had all but stopped going up for what is now 15 years. It was inadvertently the perfect night. Barry’s blinkered bias merged with, as my colleague Andrew Bolt put it on his blog more fully exorciating Suzuki, the Canadian blowhard’s pig ignorance on the global warming issue.

The Bolt Report October 27 2013, Warmist SCAM ARTISTS ALP / Green Loons,Al Gore Their ABC

Greens leader Christine Milne tells ABC seven global warming porkies.  ABC corrects none

Racist Bigot and Misandrist Green Loon Christine Milne blames it all on" older white men"

Nigel Farage

Sydney's Macquarie University full steam ahead with the progressive's Consensus Science

Purging Macquarie University of "Non Consensus" thinkers

From
JoNova 
Tackling tribal groupthink

Remind's me of Romania under the rule of Nicu and Elena Ceausecu, she was the nations "Chief Scientist" A simpleton pig ignorant Communist thug in control of The Party's, The People's (Communist) Science.

It was the Hawk Labor Government that welcomed these two gangsters to Australia as honoured guests, birds of a feather with shared ideals and plans for humanity.

Agenda 21,UN,International Socialism,Anthropogenic Global Warming SCAM,Michael McLaren and Professor David Flint

Lord Christopher Moncton Agenda 21 Anthropogenic Global Warming SCAM

Brian Wilshire speaks with Lord Christopher Monckton about climate change,world 

government and Agenda 21.

Brian Wilshire's response to a "Warmist's" email on Anthropogenic Global Warming

Renewable Energy HOAX The Tax to EXIST

The Tax to EXIST

Alan Jones: Delingpole,Coal Seam Gas,Shut the Gate,Terry McCrann,

Labor Green Loons Wind Power SCAM

Andrew Bolt and author Donna La Framboise discuss the Anthropogenic Global Warming SCAM

Blast from the Past October 30 2011

Andrew Bolt speaks with visiting climate change sceptic and author Donna La Framboise

The Bolt Report 10 Network Sydney 30 10 2011


Donna La framboise  Blog
NoFrakkingConsensus


Report below on Donna La framboise Sydney appearance from:

Donna Laframboise in Sydney

WEDNESDAY, 11 JULY 2012 10:51 AM · 

by SIMON

Last night I attended the Sydney talk of Canadian author and blogger Donna Laframboise, whose book, "The Delinquent Teenager who was mistaken for the world's top Climate Expert" has recently been published here in Australia.

A large crowd had gathered at the Sheraton on the Park to hear Donna speak about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

 Donna Laframboise

In her talk, she explained how despite protestations that the IPCC was a collection of the world's best climate scientists, much of the IPCC's reports were written by students and environmental activists, and that many appointments to the panel were politically motivated.

She also showed that the IPCC's claim only to rely on peer-reviewed science was false, with over 30% of the references cited in the recent AR4 coming from newspaper clippings, WWF and Greenpeace reports, press releases and other grey literature. I wonder how much of that grey literature supported "the consensus"? I'm guessing roughly 100%.
I have corresponded with Donna in the past and it was great to meet her finally! Donna, I hope you enjoy the rest of your stay in "Fantasy Island".*