Climate Hoax:You Don’t Know the Half of It

You Don’t Know the Half of It: Temperature Adjustments and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology


by Jennifer Marohasy
September 28, 2015

For the true believer, it is too awful to even consider that the Australian Bureau of Meteorology could be exaggerating global warming by adjusting figures. This doesn’t mean though, that it’s not true.

 Environment Minister Greg Hunt

In fact, under Prime Minister Tony Abbott, a panel of eminent statisticians was formed to investigate these claims detailed in The Australian newspaper in August and September 2014. The panel did acknowledge in its first report that the Bureau homogenized the

temperature data: that it adjusted figures. The same report also concluded that it was unclear whether these adjustments resulted in an overall increase or decrease in the warming trend. No conclusions could be drawn because the panel did not work through a single example of homogenization, not even for Rutherglen. Rutherglen is of course in north eastern Victoria, an agricultural research station with a continuous minimum temperature record unaffected by equipment changes or documented site-moves, but where the Bureau nevertheless adjusted the temperatures. This had the effect of turning a temperature time series without a statistically significant trend, into global warming of almost 2 degrees per Century.

According to media reports last week, a thorough investigation of the Bureau’s methodology was prevented because of intervention by Environment Minister Greg Hunt. He apparently argued in Cabinet that the credibility of the institution was paramount. That it is important the public have trust in the Bureau’s data and forecasts, so the public know to heed warning of bushfires and cyclones.

This is the type of plea repeatedly made by the Catholic Church hierarchy to prevent the truth about paedophilia, lest the congregation lose faith in the church.

Contrast this approach with that by poet and playwright Henrik Ibsen who went so far as to suggest ‘the minority is always right’ in an attempt to have his audience examine the realities of 18th Century morality. Specifically, Ibsen wanted us to consider that sometimes the individual who stands alone is making a valid point which is difficult to accept because every culture has its received wisdoms: those beliefs that cannot be questioned, until they are proven in time to have been wrong. British biologist, and contemporary of Charles Darwin, Thomas Huxley was trying to make a similar point when he wrote, “I am too much of a skeptic to deny the possibility of anything.”

Mr Hunt defends the Bureau because they have a critical role to play in providing the Australian community with reliable weather forecasts. This is indeed one of their core responsibilities. They would, however, be better able to perform this function, if they used proper techniques for quality control of temperature data, and the best available techniques for forecasting rainfall [1]. Of concern, there has been no improvement in their seasonal rainfall forecasts for two decades because they use general circulation models [2]. These are primarily tools for demonstrating global warming, with dubious, if any skill, at actually forecasting weather or climate.

Consider for example, the Millennium drought and the flooding rains that followed in 2010. Back in 2007, and 2008, David Jones, then and still the Manager of Climate Monitoring and Prediction at the Bureau of Meteorology, wrote that climate change was so rampant in Australia, “We don’t need meteorological data to see it” [3], and that the drought, caused by climate change, was a sign of the “hot and dry future” that we all collectively faced [4]. Then the drought broke, as usual in Australia, with flooding rains. But the Bureau was incapable of forecasting an exceptionally wet summer, because such an event was contrary to how senior management at the Bureau perceived our climate future. So, despite warning signs evident in sea surface temperature patterns across the Pacific through 2010, Brisbane’s Wivenhoe dam, a dam originally built for flood mitigation, was allowed to fill through the spring of 2010, and kept full in advance of the torrential rains in January 2011. The resulting catastrophic flooding of Brisbane is now recognized as a “dam release flood”, and the subject of a class action lawsuit by Brisbane residents against the Queensland government.

Indeed despite an increasing investment in super computers, there is ample evidence that ideology is trumping rational decision making at the Bureau on key issues that really matter, like the prediction of drought and flood cycles. Because a majority of journalists and politicians desperately want to believe that the Bureau knows best, they turn away from the truth, and ignore the facts.

News Ltd journalist Anthony Sharwood got it completely wrong in his weekend article defending the Bureau’s homogenization of the temperature record [5]. I tried to explain to him on the phone last Thursday, how the Bureau don’t actually do what they say when they homogenize temperature time series for places like Rutherglen. Mr Sharwood kept coming back to the issue of ‘motivations’. He kept asking me why on earth the Bureau would want to mislead the Australian public. I should have kept with the methodology, but I suggested he read what David Jones had to say in the Climategate emails. Instead of considering the content of the emails that I mentioned, however, Sharwood wrote in his article that, “Climategate was blown out of proportion”, and “independent investigations cleared the researchers of any form of wrongdoing”.

Nevertheless, the content of the Climategate emails includes quite a lot about homogenization, and the scientists’ motivations. For example, there is an email thread in which Phil Jones (University of East Anglia) and Tom Wigley (University of Adelaide) discuss the need to get rid of a blip in global temperatures around 1940-1944. Specifically Wigley suggested they reduce ocean temperatures by an arbitrary 0.15 degree Celsius. These are exactly the types of arbitrary adjustments made throughout the historical temperature record for Australia: adjustments made independently of any of the purported acceptable reasons for making adjustments, including site moves, and equipment changes.

Sharwood incorrectly wrote in his article that: “Most weather stations have moved to cooler areas (i.e. areas away from the urban hear island effect). So if scientists are trying to make the data reflect warmer temperatures, they’re even dumber than the sceptics think.” In fact, many (not most) weather stations have moved from post offices to airports, which have hotter, not cooler, day time temperatures. Furthermore, the urban heat island creeps into the official temperature record for Australia, not because of site moves, but because the temperature record at places like Cape Otway lighthouse is adjusted to make it similar to the record in built-up areas like Melbourne, which are clearly affected by the urban heat island [6].

I know this sounds absurd. It is absurd, and it is also true. Indeed, a core problem with the methodology that the Bureau uses is its reliance on “comparative sites” to make adjustments to data at other places. I detail the Cape Otway lighthouse example in a recent paper published in the journal Atmospheric Research, volume 166, page 145 [6].

It is so obvious that there is an urgent need for a proper, thorough and independent review of operations at the Bureau. But it would appear our politicians and many mainstream media are set against the idea. Evidently they are too conventional in their thinking to consider that such an important Australian institution could now be ruled by ideology.



This article was first published at On Line Opinion.  A shorter versions was subsequently published at The Australian, with the wonderful cartoon of Greg Hunt by Eric Lobbecke.

References/Links

1. Marohasy, J. 2014. Letter to Simon Birmingham, Re: Corruption of the official temperature record, and increasing unreliability of official seasonal rainfall forecasts.
http://jennifermarohasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Birmingham_2014_08_12.pdf

2. Abbot, J. and Marohasy J. 2014. Input selection and optimisation for monthly rainfall forecasting in Queensland, Australia, using artificial neural networks. Atmospheric Research, 138, 166-178. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169809513003141

3. Jones, D. 2007. Email to Phil Jones, Re: African stations used in HadCRU global data set. http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php

4. Jones, D. 2008. Our hot, dry future, The Sydney Morning Herald. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/our-hot-dry-future-20081005-4udg.html

5. Sharwood, A. 2015. Why are they messing with the data? http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/the-cyclone-tracy-of-ideological-battles-does-the-weather-bureau-tweak-data-or-is-our-government-paranoid/story-fnjwvztl-1227545670243?sv=a58a1574c4a196289acf208f11fc2d2b

6. Marohasy, J. and Abbot, J. 2015. Assessing the quality of eight different maximum temperature time series as inputs when using artificial neural networks to forecast monthly rainfall at Cape Otway, Australia. Atmospheric Research, 166, 141-149. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169809515002124

Australia's ablaze with climate ARSE Clowns

Australia's ablaze with climate clowns

Tim Blair
The Daily Telegraph
October 28, 2013 

AUSTRALIA is a deeply puzzling land, especially to foreign media types. Even basic geography is sometimes a cause of bewilderment. For example, in 2011 Britain's Daily Mail tried to depict the extent of that year's Queensland floods with a helpful map of eastern Australia. This isn't a particularly difficult cartographic assignment, but the Mail managed to get it wrong, inventing the brand new state of Capricornia to Queensland's north.

The current NSW fires have prompted similar blunders. Last week the US television network NBC ran a graphic intended to show the range of the fires. They turned out to be far more extensive than anyone in Australia was aware.

NBC may have sourced their information from a Geoscience Australia monitoring site that lists hazard reduction burns and other non-threatening fires along with the massive conflagrations throughout NSW. The result was a graphic showing almost the entire northwest of Australia covered with flames. Darwin hasn't seen the likes of this since the Japanese bombing in World War II. Poor Capricornia copped it again as well. So did arid desert areas, which apparently now feature rare combustible dirt.

Elementary geographic and factual errors are one thing. It gets worse when ignorant outsiders lecture us about our own country. Former US vice-president turned global warming millionaire Al Gore barged in on local affairs last week, courtesy of the ABC.

"The Australian Prime Minister has said in the last couple of hours that bushfires are a function of life in Australia and nothing to do with climate change," presenter Annabel Crabb asked. "What do you make of those remarks?"

"Well, it's not my place to get involved in your politics," Gore replied, before doing exactly that.

"It reminds me of politicians here in the US who got a lot of support from the tobacco companies and who argued to the public that there was absolutely no connection between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer," Gore said. "And for 40 years the tobacco companies were able to persuade pliant politicians within their grip to tell the public what they wanted them to tell them."

Gore should know. He was one of those pliant politicians, accepting campaign contributions from tobacco companies even after his older sister died of lung cancer. If you could burn hypocrisy, Al Gore would be the planet's single largest energy source.

Time magazine's Brooklyn-based Bryan Walsh also took aim at Abbott in a subtle piece headlined "Climate Change Affects Australia's Epic Wildfires - No Matter What Prime Minister Says."

Oddly, Australian leftists lap this stuff up. Show them a non-interfering British royal and they scream about independence and a republic. The same types usually wail about US cultural domination of Australian. Show them a couple of climate clowns from Brooklyn and Nashville, on the other hand, and they can't wait to put a link up on Twitter.

Anyway, the grand authority of Walsh's Time piece was slightly undermined by a few subsequent corrections. "An earlier version of this article misstated that New South Wales is in south-western Australia. It is in south-eastern Australia," read one of them.

This was followed by another: "An earlier version of this article misstated the name of a former Prime Minister of Australia. She is Julia Gillard, not Gilliard."

So Walsh doesn't know anything about Australian politics or even where the fires were, but he sure knows what caused them. He's able to work that out from New York. For a more accurate view, let's turn to former CSIRO bushfire researcher David Packham, who described the supposed link between fires and climate change as "absolute nonsense".

"If there is any global warming, the global warming is so slow and so small that the bushfire event is totally overrun by the fuel state," Packham continued. But what would he know? He's only an Australian who happens to have studied bush fires for more than 50 years. Warmies prefer their climate advice to be global.

Australia's Green (ALP) Loon Leader Christine Milne

One Million Australian Native Animals sacrificed on the Green Loons alter of Environmentalism & Junk Science.

Links added to thi sarticle by ANV

Mike McLaren and Julia Patrick Green Dreaming of a Human-Free Environment

Green Dreaming of a Human-Free Environment

Julia Patrick

QUADRANT
March 2013

In 2001, US cattle rancher Ken Freeman made an unnerving discovery: under the auspices of the UN, his ranch in Alabama showed up dark green on the Environment Protection Agency’s map. The code for dark green read: “Human-free habitat”.

Environmental treaties with the United Nations have never been formally ratified by the US Congress, so after a prolonged stoush, Ken and his newly formed Alliance for Citizens’ Rights successfully thwarted the UN’s intention to remove their livelihood and drive them off their land. Alabama then became the first state in the USA where “infringement on the property rights of citizens linked to any other international law ... is prohibited”. 

Australia’s situation is quite different. The 1999 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and a plethora of legislation relying on our obligations as signatories to international conventions have made us subservient to the UN. It has us over a barrel.

The push to remake Australia as a socialist state, under the guise of concern for the environment, is mightily emboldened by these obligations, as we’re overwhelmed by a dizzying, increasing multitude of green projects and “initiatives” that are breathtaking in their breadth and brazen in their audacity. 

Quietly announced by Labor’s Minister for the Environment, Tony Burke, on November 4, and flying under the radar, is the National Wildlife Corridors Plan. The intention of this fancifully destructive scheme is to preserve land for the exclusive use of plant and animal wildlife as they fly, hop or crawl along their personalised routes that “will connect habitat patches within and across borders, along rainfall and altitudinal gradients and stretch across Australia”.

Connectivity is the buzzword; habitat patches, protected areas and national parks must be connected to “make the landscape habitable for communities of plants and animals, allowing their movement, adaptation and evolution”. Farming, grazing, an orchard or a bee farm must give way before the need of the Wallum sedge frog or the golden sun moth to multiply freely without intrusion by man.

The term “human-free habitat” is not used to describe the scheme, but in this theatre of the absurd the intention is the same. The word corridor implies something narrow, but Burke’s corridors will slice wide swathes through Australia, including large areas of private land, in wide, unbroken chains.

There are several existing corridor “foundation stones”. They include Habitat 141, trumpeting itself as “Ocean to Outback—a vision for conserving, restoring and reconnecting ecosystems” covering 18 million hectares and stretching across the borders of South Australia, Victoria and New South Wales. The Great Eastern Ranges is a 3600-kilometre initiative “to protect and connect native ecosystems from central Victoria to far north Queensland”. Needing protection here are the spotted-tailed quoll and the dusky antechinus.  

“The intent” of the Trans-Australia Eco-Link “is to create a wide band of connectivity stretching 3500 km from Arnhem Land in the north to Port Augusta in the south”, while The Gondwana Link Ltd in Western Australia “could prove important for ecological adaptation to climate change”. Climate change is frequently called upon to give evidence in the Corridors Plan.

The Plan is rich with beguiling, feel-good senti­ments. Pictures show earnest-looking people huddling over maps or planting seedlings; a girl in a pond with a fish net represents employment opportunities. Strangely, there’s a picture of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, albeit with a tree trunk poking up in the foreground. Make of that what you will.  

As the Plan’s fifty pages rattle on with pretentious bureau-babble of “riparian vegetation”, “resilience thinking”, “spatial scales” and references ad nauseam to ecosystems, habitats and biodiversity, the core objective of putting productive land out of reach remains unchanged. But it is coyly vague on how all this will be managed; there may be “diverse governance arrangements”, “cross-jurisdictional collaboration” and “partnerships involving governments, conservation groups, NGOs, private landholders, industry, philanthropic organisations, businesses, indigenous and community groups” and similar blather. And who pays?

We, the public, are “invited” to put up nominations for new corridors—which could be along Aboriginal songlines—for assessment by that faceless entity, an “independent council”.

As for private land, Burke says, “Participation ... is voluntary”, adding “The Plan does not, of itself, lock up any land.” What does “of itself” mean?

Free of human endeavour, land cannot be farmed or grazed to create an income; then what choice does the landowner have except to leave—voluntarily? Private land is under siege simply by making it untenable to live on.

Fabian gradualism is the game plan; Jan Davis, CEO of the Tasmanian Farmers & Graziers Association, sums it up precisely:

What you smell here is a farmland version of bracket creep. First it’s voluntary, then under pressure from ENGOs and Green coalition partners, it becomes an imposed regime, that imposed regime becomes intergenerational as covenants on freehold land become binding on the next generation of Tasmanian farmers.

The environmental push took off seriously in 1992 when a collection of power-hungry luminaries (among them Mikhail Gorbachev, Al Gore and Paul Keating) met in Rio and formed “a global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth’s ecosystem”. While stating that “Environmental education is not neutral but ideological. It is a political act”, the conference gave itself the appealingly benign name of “Earth Summit” to conceal its intention.

The environmental movement is a vast global network of interlocking organisations and myriad fiefdoms with unelected representatives; it is simply a smokescreen for promoting the socialist agenda worldwide—exactly as the Earth Summit intended. So far, it’s been a thumping success. 

Julia Patrick writes on social and electoral issues.

Anthropogenic Global Warming Rats jumping ship.

Losing their religion as evidence cools off

BY: MAURICE L. NEWMAN
The Australian
November 05, 2012 12:00AM 

ONCE upon a time when Christendom was at its peak, missionaries would be dispatched to the four corners of the globe in search of converts. They believed their mission would expand the influence of Rome and save heathens from eternal damnation.

It was a compelling message. Convert and enjoy everlasting life in the hereafter. The advantage the missionaries had was that the religion they taught had no hypotheses that could be tested. Death - "the undiscovered country from whose bourn no traveller returns" - meant that the afterlife could be neither proved nor disproved. Faith was the only thing needed.

Climate science is a bit like that - push the rewards and the catastrophes far enough into the future, and have faith that the prophecies will come true. However, unlike heaven, which we may reach at any time, climate prophecies need to be distant enough to make them hard to challenge yet sufficiently close to generate urgent action.

So when in 1969 Paul Ehrlich claimed because of global cooling it was an even-money bet whether England would survive until the year 2000, he could not immediately be proven wrong. After all, this was a cooling period.

Unfortunately for him, England is still inhabited and his predictions are still remembered. Ehrlich is now a warmist. Like a good stock analyst, when the company doesn't perform as you thought, better to change the recommendation from a sell to a buy, than admit you were wrong.

When Mother Nature decided in 1980 to change gears from cooler to warmer, a new global warming religion was born, replete with its own church (the UN), a papacy, (the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), and a global warming priesthood masquerading as climate scientists. Selfish humans in rich, polluting countries were blamed for the warming and had to pay for past trespasses by providing material compensation to poor nations as penance. Cutting greenhouse gas emissions became the new holy grail. With a warm wind at their backs, these fundamentalists collected hundreds of billions of dollars from naive governments that adopted their faith on behalf of billions of people. No crusader was ever so effective.

The message was stark. If the non-believers didn't convert immediately, our children and grandchildren would face a hell on earth. The priesthood excommunicated and humiliated sceptics and deniers. Alternative views were not tolerated and, where possible, were suppressed. Did someone mention the dark ages?

Because the new arrangements would distort capital allocations, disciples wrote economic texts showing how inefficient, productivity-sapping and costly green industries would actually boost economic activity and employment.

Unfortunately, the cost of saving the planet would fall disproportionately on the poor. This wealth transfer to the rich was unavoidable and, if the poor or the infirm died of cold or heat because they could not afford airconditioning, they would simply be martyrs to the cause. In any case, who could they appeal to? All political parties had signed up to the new religion.

But, self-deluded by the warming period and their confirmatory bias, the priesthood was overtaken by hubris and made increasingly extravagant claims. We were advised that Armageddon was now even closer at hand.

Regrettably for the global warming religion, its predictions have started to appear shaky, and the converts, many of whom have lost their jobs and much of their wealth, are losing faith. Worse, heretic scientists have been giving the lie to many of the prophecies described in the IPCC bible. They could not be silenced.

Of course, the IPCC texts can be interpreted in different ways and sceptics have obviously chosen the wrong interpretation.

When atmospheric temperatures on which we had relied failed to comply with the prophecies, the waverers were instructed to look at ocean temperatures and rising sea levels.

So far, so good. However, the British arm of the climate establishment silently released an encyclical that revealed no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures from the beginning of 1997 until August this year.

This communique was unearthed by the heretic newspaper, the Daily Mail, which pointed out that this period was of about the same duration as when temperatures rose between 1980 to 1996.

Of course, the religious high priests were quick to play down the significance of this pause. Phil Jones of the Climategate denomination claimed it was to be expected and, he insisted, 15 or 16 years is not a significant period.

Yet in 2009 he said that a "no upward trend has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried". But that was then and this is now and he is not about to lose his religion simply because the evidence doesn't support the text.

And, of course, there are always extenuating circumstances. El Nino and La Nina are there when you need them, to be forgotten when temperatures are warming or remembered if they are cooling. And, we've had a record Arctic melt. But better not mention the storm that NASA concedes broke the ice up and drove it south, or the record Antarctic ice gain.

Rather we must listen to Australia's Climate Change Commission novitiates who, against the evidence, have delivered a parable linking Superstorm Sandy to global warming.

At least the media disciples are keeping the faith by emphasising what supports the gospel and, where possible, omitting that which doesn't. New, corroborative revelations enjoy widespread publicity. If the same findings are later retracted for lack of scientific rigour, they are simply allowed to disappear without comment.

Yet despite all, believers in man-made global warming are declining. It will require an extraordinary crusade presaging even direr climate consequences for defying the warmist faith, before defectors even contemplate rejoining the religion. If that fails it may be time to burn sceptics at the stake. But then that would increase CO2 emissions. A dilemma, to be sure.

Maurice L. Newman is a former chairman of the ABC.

Green Loon’s Parliamentary rant labeled “Claptrap”

Green MP Adam Bandt's carbon rant ridiculed

Alison Rehn
The Daily Telegraph

September 20, 2011

THE nation faces a doomsday scenario of "hurricanes, storms and floods" unless action is taken on climate change, Greens MP Adam Bandt warned yesterday.

During yesterday's carbon tax debate, Mr Bandt said every person was threatened by climate change and "we are running out of time to prevent a catastrophe". "Ice caps are melting and the seas are rising," he said. "The hit to the Australian economy if we are not able to prevent runaway climate change is going to be enormous.

Mr Bandt warned jobs were threatened by climate change, saying that in Queensland 67,000 workers directly dependent on tourism and the Great Barrier Reef could be "turfed out of a job" if the reef is irreversibly damaged.

Speaking immediately after Mr Bandt, NSW Nationals MHR Mark Coulton said he had "never heard so much emotional claptrap".

"It seems to me that there's a lot of houses, a lot of buildings in the middle of Melbourne made out of concrete and it seems to me that while the good folk of Melbourne might have a desire to improve the environment, they don't appear to be doing too much of it themselves," Mr Coulton said.

 

Technorati Tags: NSW Nationals MHR Mark Coulton,Greens MP Adam Bandt,Great Barrier Reef,Australia,Green Loons,Green Hoax

Labor Loons Plibersek and Bradbury demand Australians pay their CO2 TAX or else!!!!!!

Climate change - Labor believes the end is nigh

Neil Keene

The Daily Telegraph
August 05, 2011

FIRST it was floods and famine, now it is disease that the ALP says will get us if we don't stop climate change.

Minister for Human Services Tanya Plibersek's prediction this week that global warming would wipe out the Great Barrier Reef, Kakadu and much of Australia's food supply earned her the unofficial title of prophet of doom.

But she might have a worthy deputy in Western Sydney MP David Bradbury. In a recent statement, Mr Bradbury warned that climate change would result locally in an outbreak of serious disease.

"Without taking action, Australia is expected to experience higher rates of infectious and vector-borne diseases as well as food and waterborne diseases," he said.

Vector-borne diseases currently in Australia include dengue fever, malaria and Ross River fever.

Ironically, Mr Bradbury was speaking at the time to protest against what he described as the Coalition's "scaremongering" tactics.

Yesterday, Mr Bradbury said a range of scientific bodies had highlighted the impacts of climate change on human health, including the World Health Organisation and the Australian Medical Association.

Liberal senator for Western Sydney Marise Payne said Mr Bradbury should be more concerned about the immediate effects of a carbon tax on his local community.

"If what Mr Bradbury is saying is not scare tactics, I don't know what is," the Liberal Senator said.

The Coalition claims soaring electricity prices will cost Nepean Hospital $150,000-$300,000 more a year.

"The implications of the carbon tax cannot be blithely wiped aside," Ms Payne said.

"It means three nursing professionals or three other medical professionals on the ground and assisting patients at Nepean Hospital."

Australian Medical Association president Steve Hambleton said the extreme weather events caused by climate change could increase the risk of disease, particularly with flooding and waterborne illness.

Bradbury bites back
Written by Troy Dodds
WesternWeekender
Friday, 15 July 2011 16:09 
Federal Member for Lindsay, David Bradbury, today accused State Member for Penrith, Stuart Ayres, of using dodgy figures to exaggerate the effects of carbon pricing on the health care system.
“Stuart Ayres will not reveal the details of the modelling he relies upon because he is using dodgy figures to create fear about the impact of the carbon price.” Mr Bradbury said.
In a statement today, Mr Bradbury's office said Treasury modelling indicates that the impact of a carbon price on the cost of hospital and medical services will be minimal – around 0.3% based on a $23 carbon price.
“Failing to act on Climate Change will come at a greater cost to the health system overtime.” Mr Bradbury said.
“Without taking action, Australia is expected to experience higher rates of infectious and vector-borne diseases as well as food and water borne diseases.
“If Stuart Ayres is serious about delivering better health services, he should spend less time on opportunistic media stunts about Federal issues and more time explaining to the nurses and paramedics of Nepean Hospital why his Government is stripping away their pay and conditions."
100 public sector workers rallied in protest outside Mr Ayres’ office this week, representing the 12,000 public sector workers who live and work in Penrith and surrounding areas.
“Stuart Ayres should leave the media stunts on Federal issues to Tony Abbott and instead explain to our local public sector workers why his Government is taking away their rights," Mr Bradbury said.

Tanya Plibersek on their ABC’s Q&A, Monday August 1 2011

Lord Christopher Monckton and Dr Richard Denniss National Press Club Canberra.

The Galileo Movement

Professor Richard Lindzen talks with Alan Jones about the Anthropogenic Global Warming CO2 TAX Hoax and the Galileo Movement.

Professor Richard Lindzen:Labor’s CO2 tax SCAM exposed… AGAIN

Australia: Labor’s CO2 TAX On EVERYTHING explained, CO2 Tax for Dummies

Australia: JuLIAR Gillards Green HOAX go to man Tim / Flim Flannery puts his foot in it again.

Australia: The Green Loon Eco Vandals and the Insanity of their Wind Turbines

What’s a Carbon Tax and what’s wrong with it?

Australia GREEN HOAX JUNK SCIENCE: No CO2 TAX,Angry Anderson

Australians tell Madame Gillard, Australia’s Socialist Liar for Hire PM just how popular she really is, whilst fellow Socialist Hussein Obama sings her praises

 

Technorati Tags: Tanya Plibersek,David Bradbury,Green Loons,Labor Loons,International Socialism,CO2 TAX,Anthropogenic Global Warming,Green Hoax,Junk Science

Lord Christopher Monckton and Dr Richard Denniss National Press Club Canberra.

 

July 19 2011 National Press Club Canberra Australia

Technorati Tags: Lord Christopher Monckton,Dr Richard Denniss,Climate Change,CO2TAX,Anthropogenic Global Warming,International Socialism

The Galileo Movement

 

Alan Jones speaks with The Galileo Movements Malcolm Roberts on the Anthropogenic Global Warming CO2 TAX SCAM.

Professor Richard Lindzen talks with Alan Jones about the Anthropogenic Global Warming CO2 TAX Hoax and the Galileo Movement.

 

Technorati Tags: Alan Jones,Malcolm Roberts,CO2 TAX,Green Loons,Tim Flannery,Bob Brown,Christine Milne,Sarah Hanson Young,Rob Oakeshott,Tony Windsor,Julia Gillard,Greg Combet,Kevin Rudd,Al Gore,ACTU,Get Up,Australian Labor Party,Penny Wong,Green Hoax,CO2 SCAM,United Nations

Professor Richard Lindzen talks with Alan Jones about the Anthropogenic Global Warming CO2 TAX Hoax and the Galileo Movement.

 

Alan Jones talks with Professor Richard Lindzen

 

 

Alan Jones comments on Australia’s pathetic excuse for a Federal Government

Technorati Tags: Anthropogenic Global Warming,Climate Change,Green Hoax Tax SCAM,CO2 Tax scam,Green Loons,Australian Labor Party,Bob Brown,United Nations,Al Gore,Christine Milne,Rob Oakeshott,Tony Windsor,Sarah Hanson Young,Wayne Swan,Penny Wong,Greg Combet,Australian Council of Trade Unions,Julia Gillard

Professor Richard Lindzen:Labor’s CO2 tax SCAM exposed… AGAIN.

 

Professor Richard Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,speaks to Radio 2GB’s Chris Smith, on the Union funded,(ACTU) Australian Labor Party/ Green Loon/ “Independent” minority coalition federal government’s, Anthropogenic Global Warming CO2 Tax SCAM.

Sydney's CO2 TAX Protest Video’s 2 4 2011

Members of the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) Get Up funded, Labor / Green Loon/ “Independent” Minority Australian Federal Government.

Australia: Labor’s CO2 TAX On EVERYTHING explained, CO2 Tax for Dummies

Technorati Tags: Julia Gillard,JuLIAR Gillard,Australian Labor Party,Bob Brown,Rob Oakeshott,Christine Milne,Tony Windsor,Australian Council of Trade Unions,ACTU,Greens,ALP,Independents,Australia’s Union funded Labor/Green/ “Independent” minority Government,ALP Green Independent Co Party,Green Independent LOONS,Wayne Swan,Lu Kewen,Kevin 07,Kevin Rudd,Tim Flannery,Madame Gillard,Professor Richard Lindzen,Labor’s CO2 TAX SCAM

Sydney's CO2 TAX Protest Video’s 2 4 2011

 

More  HERE

Today 2 4 2011, Sydney was host to another ANTI CO2 TAX protest.

There was also a group of George Soro’s and Australian Council of Trade Union funded Get Up activists and Labor’s useful idiots protesting at another venue who were DEMANDING to be TAXED even more than they (hopefully) already are,assuming they do actually work for a living, by the Minority,Union Funded Socialist Labor / Green Loon / “Independent” Australian Federal Government,led by Labor’s Madame Gillard.

There are no reports of the PRO CO2 TAX supporters offering to voluntarily pay the TAX TODAY out of their Social Security benefits and (Adult School Children) University subsidies,so maybe they think that “paying to save the planet” can wait, as opposed to their posters that claim that immediate action is necessary to SAVE ALL life as we know it TODAY.

That claim been in stark contrast to Labor’s Minority Government talking head aka. PM Madame Gillard’s “Go To” Anthropogenic Global Warming alarmist in chief, Paleontologist,that's right a Dinosaur hunter not a Climatologist, or a Geologist  a Dinosaur Hunter,Tim Flannery,who a few days ago ADMITTED that if the entire world went back into the dark ages today,it would take a THOUSAND years before there would be ANY reduction in CO2 Levels. Australian Taxpayers WAGES are been garnisheed to pay Labor’s ARSE CLOWN’S $180,000 a year to study Chicken entrails and report back to  Bob Brown’s Bitch, Madame Gillard, with his “Scientifically” based predictions on the future of the world.

It is long past time that the Labor Party,their Comrades in Arms, the Green Loons and their “Independents”, Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor,that make up Australia’s Minority Socialist Federal Government are taken into CARE.

Since they formed a “ Co Government” they have, in true Labor / Socialist Loon tradition stuffed everything they have touched,they are “Errol Flynn's” if you like.

Madame JuLIAR Gillard should concentrate on just FUCKING her Hairdresser Boyfriend,(or any of the other two married Labor Party members she has previously FUCKED oops sorry “slept with”) oops sorry “Partner Tim”

Tim Mathieson,Madame Gillard’s Hairdresser and “Partner” and Father of Staci Child ,below.

Madame Gillard’s Boyfriend’s Daughter aka. Madame Ju LIARS “Step Daughter” Staci Child.

rather than FUCKING AUSTRALIA back into the STONE AGE along with her “Co Government” partner Green Loon, Bob Brown FUCKING his “Pastoralists Partner” Paul Thomas.

Fuck yourselves into oblivion for all I care , just leave OUR Australia ALONE,ya Fucking NUT JOBS!!!!

 

Green Loon Leader Bob Brown (l) and “Partner” ‘Pastoralists” Paul Thomas (r) (at least Paul left his cloths on for the picture)

Technorati Tags: Bob Brown,Julia Gillard,JuLIAR Gillard,Anthropogenic Global Warming,Green Hoax,Staci Child,Tim Mathieson,CO2 TAX,Green Hoax SCAM,International Socialism,United Nations World Tax on WORKERS,Green Loons

Labor's CO2 TAX HOAX Exposed again

 

 

Labors TAX on Australians very existence, a Union Funded, United Nations subservient,Socialist, Green Loon, Independent Minority Coalition Australian Government dedicated to driving Australia back into the stone age.

A Socialist Government that thinks that the right to affordable Gas,Electricity and fresh running water is a LUXUREY that only the socialist Green Loon elites are entitled to in their brave new United Nations Agenda 21 world.

The true cost of Julia Gillard's new carbon tax

Gemma Jones and Andrew Carswell

The Daily Telegraph

April 02, 2011

THE carbon tax Prime Minister Julia Gillard promised never to introduce will cost average families $860 a year, Federal Government modelling has revealed.

Based on a carbon price of $30 a tonne, families would pay up to $218 more for electricity, $114 for gas, $187 for petrol and $88 for food.

Treasury documents, released under FOI, revealed households would pay the fixed price for between three and five years (before moving to an emissions trading scheme), leaving families with a bill between $2589 and $4315 over that time.Heavily censored documents claim price rises would "drive household behaviour change, with households substituting to less carbon intensive goods over time".

But it was acknowledged in a Treasury executive minute last October that low-income families would suffer the most because they spend more on things like electricity and are least able to afford low emissions technology.Treasury also raised fears the tax would reduce people's wealth.

"A carbon price will also affect wealth as the change in prices flows through to the value of financial assets, including shares, and reduces the real value of savings," the minute states.

PM Gillard's carbon hit

It also shows the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme proposed in 2009 by former PM Kevin Rudd would have raised electricity prices by a maximum $120 a year and gas by $52 - half the cost of the Treasury estimates now.

"This just demonstrates that the Government has known all along that its carbon tax won't clean up the environment but it will clean out your wallet," Opposition Leader Tony Abbott said.

Treasurer Wayne Swan hit back yesterday, claiming the figures were preliminary numbers and he said he could not nominate how much assistance families would be given by way of compensation.

"Until the final design and modelling have been settled, anyone who uses these figures to scare families about prices is engaging in a scare campaign," he said.

The Government is reportedly considering tax and welfare breaks of between $600 and $1500 a year.

It comes as an exclusive survey by The Daily Telegraph reveals why voters are so angry about the proposal. A quarter of the 2500 households surveyed said they were already struggling to make ends meet and almost 9 per cent said they didn't have enough money to pay bills.

"I think it might be an unnecessary tax, I could probably do better with the money in my pocket and make a concerted effort to reduce my carbon emissions, rather than be taxed," Greg Hudson, 32, from Neutral Bay, said yesterday.

 

Technorati Tags: Anthropogenic Global Warming SCAM,Green HOAX,International Socialism,Tax on Western Middle Class,The Road to Serfdom,Agenda 21,Australian Labor Party,Australian Council of Trade Unions,Green Loons,Rob Oakeshott,Tony Windsor,Professor John Christy

Australia: JuLIAR Gillards Green HOAX go to man Tim / Flim Flannery puts his foot in it again.

Carbon tax is fatal political poison

Tim Blair
The Daily Telegraph
March 28, 2011
AN oldtimer filmed at a recent rally in favour of a carbon tax made the standard appeal to emotion. "I'm concerned," she said, "about the kind of world we're going to leave my grandchildren."
Another rally granny at the Melbourne event organised "spontaneously" by the offered a similar view: "I've got a new grandchild, two weeks old, and I think it's really important that the world is made safe for him."

Well, tough luck, ladies. Last week Tim Flannery, Australia's Chief Climate Commissioner, told The Daily Telegraph's Andrew Bolt in a radio interview: "If we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to drop for about a thousand years."
A thousand years.

Andrew Bolt and JuLIAR’s CO2 Tax SCAM  go to man,Tim (Flim) Flannery

And Flannery wasn't just talking about Australia's minuscule proposed emissions cuts. He was referring to cuts made across the globe. If Flannery keeps coming up with lines like this, he's worth every cent of the $720,000 we're paying him over the next four years to tell us why we'll be better off with a carbon tax.

Forget saving your grandchildren, eco-biddies. According to Flannery, the world won't be safer until your grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren are on the scene.

 
Julia Gillard can't be happy with the value she's getting from palaeontologist Flannery. Perhaps she should take up one online suggestion and revise his pay schedule; say, down to $720 per year until 3011. That way there would at least be some connection between reward and results. As it stands, Professor Dinosaur Bones is cashing in on a temperature drop we won't see until the next NSW Labor government.
Maybe by then we'll have a Greens representative in the Lower House. Two of them were expected to easily win seats on Saturday, but both Marrickville and Balmain are now likely to be decided on postal votes. There's still a chance Fiona Byrne and Jamie Parker could claim victory, but the anticipated Greensweep never materialised.

Labor voters went to the Liberals instead, even in Balmain, of all places, where Liberal James Falk found himself unexpectedly leading on primaries as counting ended on Saturday night. "Will have to move away from Balmain electorate in disgust," fumed one angry Greens voter on Twitter. "And I was so proud of us too, it was a sure thing."
There's only one sure thing in Australian politics, besides Bob Brown's election night speeches about the brilliant Greens result, and it was revealed again on the weekend.
Climate change might not stabilise until 40 generations from now, but it's already a consistent political killer.
It wouldn't have helped Labor at state level that Gillard launched her uncosted, undetailed, un-anything carbon tax plan during the NSW election campaign. Nor would the Greens already handicapped by two awesomely charmless candidates have been assisted by incoming premier Barry O'Farrell's campaign focus on the planned tax.

Two federal leaders, Kevin Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull, were removed within six months of each other because of popularity plunges associated with climate advocacy. Gillard would have joined them after last year's election if she'd told the truth about her carbon tax scheme. Now we've even got Balmain voting for a state party that opposes carbon pricing. Liberal staffers claim the issue was a "flashpoint" in many Labor electorates.
The message will sink in one day. Outside of certain small political and journalistic cultures, climate change is worse than a non-issue. It's an issue disputed and rejected.
Australians are now broadly aware that we only contribute 1.4 per cent of the planet's alleged warming gases and they don't see why we should have to sacrifice our wages to make a difference when no difference can be made.

Sooner or later, somewhere in the world a mainstream political party possibly from the left is going to say: "Hey, we went along with all of that global warming stuff for a few years. We were scared we'd lose votes if we didn't. But now we realise no policies we devise can make any significant impact. From now on, environmental spending will be limited to the the environment people live in. Here are all your taxes back. Sorry."
On current trends, such a policy would probably do rather well. They could even quote Tim Flannery "if we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to drop for about a thousand years" in support of it.
Meanwhile, we have to put up with Gillard's apocalyptic fear campaign. As The Australian reports, Gillard has sent out scripted lines Labor MPs can use to spook people into backing the carbon tax. "If we don't act," runs the script, "then we will see more extreme weather events like bushfires and droughts. We will have more days of extreme heat and we will see our coastline flooded as sea levels rise."

The document continues: "Sea levels could rise by up to a metre and possibly even more by the end of the century. Up to 250,000 existing homes are at risk of inundation." And if you're not already incinerated or starved or drowned, there's also problems with skiing: "Climate change will see the average snow season contract by between 85 per cent and 96 per cent by 2050."
Imagine Labor candidates trying these lines in hard-working electorates. Picture a fellow playing with his four-year-old daughter when the doorbell rings. It's an earnest Laborite come to warn about climate change. By the time he's halfway through his pitch ... talking about all the pets catching fire, or grandma getting tsunamied the little girl is almost in tears.
Her father hasn't spoken for some time. He's listening to the man frightening his daughter.
Eventually he quietly tells the girl to go and see her mother. Daddy wants to talk to the scary man in private.
Picture what happens next. Hint: he doesn't volunteer to hand out Labor how-to-vote cards. Not in a thousand years.

Technorati Tags: Australian Conservation Foundation,the Australian Council of Trade Unions,the Australian Youth Climate Coalition,Beyond Zero Emissions,the Climate Action Network Australia,the Climate Emergency Network,Environment Victoria,GetUp,Greenpeace,Locals Into Victoria's Environment,the Moreland Energy Foundation,Oxfam,the World Wildlife Fund and 350.org,Tim Flannery,Andrew Bolt,Marrickville Council,Balmain,Bob Brown,Green Loons,CO2TAX,Carbon Tax,Cgreen Hoax SCAM,Anthropogenic Global Warming SCAM,Greens Ponzi SCAM,International Socialism New World Order,United Nations

Australia: The Green Loon Eco Vandals and the Insanity of their Wind Turbines

Miranda Devine

SMH Sunday, March 20, 2011 at 09:36am

IF YOU thought pink batts were a poorly implemented, badly designed, money-wasting, deadly green disaster, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

Try wind turbines.

The Gillard Government’s rush to make green energy provide 20 per cent of the nation’s power by 2020 is despoiling and dividing once peaceful rural communities, slashing the value of properties, driving people mad with their infrasound throbbing, while driving up electricity prices, and doing absolutely nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

And all of it is subsidised by you, the hapless taxpayer.

Wind turbines 150m high are springing up all over Victoria and NSW on prime agricultural land, with minimal consultation with farming communities, and reported detrimental health effects.

In bushfire-prone country, not only do they pose a fire hazard if they spontaneously combust (as one did five months ago in South Australia), but aerial fire suppression is impossible near the turbines.

From Collector, Boorowa, Rugby and Nimmitabel in southern NSW, to Ararat, Mortlake, Beaufort, Moorabool and Ballarat in Victoria, people have found themselves encircled by wind turbines, which give them headaches, stop them sleeping, emit a hum like a “huge jet engine rumbling”, and create a sun-flicker strobe effect as the blades turn.

Unsurprisingly, more than 1000 submissions have flooded into a Senate inquiry into wind farms, which will hold a public hearing this week.

Already, in Victoria, Premier Ted Baillieu is heeding community anger about the turbines, and last week released a wind farm policy requiring new turbines be at least 2km from any dwelling.

But in NSW the situation is far worse, thanks to planning law 3A that allows renewable energy projects to bypass local council planning controls so that the minister is the consent authority. Lip service is paid to the usual process of community consultation, notification and objections.

That is why farmer Sam McGuiness of “Willowmere”, east of Boorowa, only knew about the 90 turbines destined for his district when a pilot asked why there was a glistening 85m-high wind mast on his boundary.

The Indian wind power company Suzlon, which had signed up his neighbour, had planted the wind-testing device.

McGuiness faces the prospect of turbines encircling his farm, slashing its value by as much as 30 per cent and driving him off the land that has been in his family for three generations.

“It’s just so hard to walk away from,” he said last week. “A lot of dreams would be gone.”

His elderly father, Joe, is distraught. “It’s his entire life’s work the whole lot sitting there.”

McGuiness grows fat lambs for Woolworths on the lush green rolling hills, and with lamb prices the best they have ever been he had hoped one day to pass the farm on to his three sons.

“We bought and paid for all this land and put in tens of thousands of hours of hard work for the future,” he says.

His neighbour, Charlie Arnott, 38, described as the “biggest greenie in the valley” who has planted 26,000 trees on his property for carbon sequestration and grows biodynamic beef, found out two weeks ago he will have 12 turbines looming over his house, between 1.3km and 2.5km away.

He is particularly concerned for the health of his 8-month-old daughter Lilla.

The wind farm company told him the turbines are allowed to be five decibels louder than background noise you get in a quiet countryside setting.

But Arnott says: “I live here BECAUSE of the background noise. I can hear the birds and the crickets and the frogs. We created a sanctuary here, that we can escape to and sit and just be. This is a real threat to that.”

The two men are not even against wind farms, in the right place, like a national park.

“It’s not a bad idea but it’s been so woefully implemented,” says McGuiness. “If you’re a superb parrot or a wedgetail eagle you have 10 times more rights than a human.”

The turbines will be as high as a 50-storey building, at 150m, almost as high as Australia Square’s tower, and the same height as Melbourne’s Crown Towers.

The funny thing is: “It’s not even that windy here. They’re not here to make electricity. They’re here to feel good for Kyoto.”

That’s the truth. Wind farms are regarded as the most expensive, inefficient way to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Wind will never replace fossil fuels because it is not reliable enough to supply base-load electricity, so another form of power always has to be at the ready. On hot, still days when people want air conditioning the turbines don’t move.

Then there is the danger to pilots. Phil Hurst, CEO of the Aerial Agricultural Association, will tell the Senate inquiry on Friday that the most immediate dangers for pilots are the invisible wind monitoring masts. They are 85m high with guy wires out to 45m.

Astonishingly, he says there is no legal requirement that the masts be marked to make them visible or that pilots be notified of their existence.

“The difficulty is they’re put up at such short notice that the paddock we treated yesterday might have been safe but today it’s not,” Hurst says.

The planes fly at heights from 3m to 30m to fertilise paddocks or spray noxious weeds. Seven weeks ago an agricultural pilot in California was killed when he flew into a 60m high monitoring mast.

“There’s no duty of care from the wind farm development. It’s a commercial enterprise passed off as feel-good for the environment.”

Then there is the economic damage to the farmer. One turbine could have a footprint of several thousand hectares, he says, because the planes need space to turn safely. “So it means you can’t treat that paddock”.

Such are the unforeseen consequences of slap-dash feel-good policies. Which just goes to show the road to hell is paved with green intentions.

devinemiranda@hotmail.com

UPDATE: A new documentary, “Windfall” may put off those who see wind as a win-win power source.
Set in Meredith, New York state, it tells the story of:

“a once-thriving dairy-farming community of fewer than 2,000 tucked into a bucolic Catskills valley that is teetering between post-agricultural poverty and hip gentrification. When Irish energy company Airtricity offers leases to build windmills on some residents’ properties, the deals initially seem like a win-win. A little extra money in the pockets of struggling farmers, an environmentally sound technology, those graceful white wings languorously slicing the afternoon sky — what’s not to like?”

UPDATE 2: Reader Glenn has pointed out this Daily Mail article about a toxic lake in China, the result of manufacturing the magnets for overseas wind turbines.
“Merely one of a multitude of environmental sins committed in the name of our new green Jerusalem.”

 

Technorati Tags: Wind Turbines,Green Hoax,Green Loons,Ju LIAR Gillard,Bob Brown,Rob Oakeshott,Tony Windsor,Collector,Boorowa,Rugby and Nimmitabel in southern NSW,to Ararat,Mortlake,Beaufort,Moorabool and Ballarat in Victoria,Charlie Arnott,Green Eco Vandals