AP’s Seth Borenstein gets something right (but only the date)

Ken McMurtrie:

An overview, directly relevant to the Paris “climate change” meeting, which destroys the substance of all of the IPCC and associated claims demanding immediate political and financial sacrifices intended to prevent catastrophic global environmental changes.
No such changes are occurring, there are no proven scientifically valid supporting facts, lies have been exposed, a political agenda is clear.
It is past time that leaders and the people woke up to reality.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

I often get emails asking me to comment in detail on an article on global warming that pretends the “problem” is worse than it is. Here is my reply to one such request.

Earth is a wilder [no], warmer [no] place since last climate deal made in 1997

By SETH BORENSTEIN,November 29, 2015 [At least he got the date right]

PARIS (AP) — This time, it’s a hotter [Satellites show no global warming for the 223 months (i.e., 18 years 7 months) since April 1997], waterier [Water vapour is difficult to measure, but some records show no change in water vapour except in the vital mid-troposphere, where it has actually declined], wilder Earth [The IPCC, both in its 2012 Special Report on Extreme Weather and in its 2013 Fourth Assessment Report, says there has been no particular overall trend in storminess…

View original 3,090 more words

Posted in AGENDA 21, AGW, climate change, ENVIRONMENT, United Nations, World Issues | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment


This is what one well-known truth activist in America thinks about the ramifications of the TPP on America.

Without doing a lot of homework, I would hazard a guess that Australia would not be a great deal differently affected.

This post is offered to thought-provoke Australians into the area of questioning what our government is intending, or allowing, ?encouraging, for our country.

{As an aside, to provoke even greater criticism (probably), but hopefully greater depth of thought – whatever his intent, the action by our PM in committing Australia to carbon emission cuts which we cannot afford and do not need, requires scientific analysis.

To facilitate the eventual phasing out of fossil fuel energy generation is indeed essential for our planet, but ruining our economy is not justified. Other plans are needed.}

From , on “Natural News”, this article:

ECONOMIC SLAVERY FOR ALL: While we were distracted with the Confederate flag flap, Congress quietly forfeited our entire economic future via fast-track trade authority

(NaturalNews) While America was distracted by a contrived, pre-planned Confederate flag distraction, the U.S. Congress forfeited the entire economic future of the country by quietly passing so-called “fast-track authority” which will allow President Obama to approve the TPP “free trade” agreement.

The TPP, as you may have heard, outright surrenders U.S. sovereignty to multinational corporations, handing them total global monopolies over labor practices, immigration, Big Pharma drug pricing, GMO food labeling, criminalization of garden seeds and much more. In all, the TPP hands over control of 80% of the U.S. economy to global monopolists, and the TPP is set up to enable those corporations to engage in virtually unlimited toxic chemical pollution, medical monopolization, the gutting of labor safety laws and much more.

Plus, did I mention the TPP will displace millions of American works as corporations outsource jobs to foreign workers? While corporations rake in the profits from new global powers, everyday American workers will lose their livelihoods and their jobs (not to mention their pensions).

Political sleight of hand: It was SOOOO easy to distract the American people with a flag flap!

Essentially, America just got sold out by people like Marco Rubio. And it was incredibly easy to pull off, too. First, America was distracted by a contrived, pre-planned mass hysteria / outrage event now known as the Confederate flag flap. Hilariously, this literal false flag controversy doesn’t even involve the actual Confederate flag. It involves a battle flag that people mistakenly think is the Confederate flag. (But who needs historical accuracy when there’s hysteria to spread?)

While Amazon.com was frantically deleting Confederate flag products from its website and everybody was going bat-crap insane over the 1970’s comedy TV series Dukes of Hazzard and its use of the so-called Confederate flag on a hot rod car, Republicans and the President were busy committing outright treason at the highest levels: surrendering American sovereignty and economically enslaving all of America’s future children.

And that’s the tragic irony of all this: While the political left falsely believed it was denouncing slavery by pressuring every online retailer and government entity to ban the Confederate flag, the U.S. Congress was busy enacting a whole new level of total economic enslavement for everyone, regardless of their skin color.

While ignorant “activists” ran around in mass hysteria, thinking they were banishing a symbol of enslavement to the history books, they were actually providing the necessary public distraction for quiet passage of the TPP’s fast-track authority.

In other words, they played right into the hands of the real slave masters: the globalist, monopolist corporations and their fascist government puppets who betray the People at every opportunity.

Believe me: These corporations don’t care about the skin color of their slave workers. They gladly enslave everyone, including you and me, if we’re stupid enough to allow our own elected representatives to forfeit America’s future (which they just did).

Screw the Confederate flag issue, folks: All Americans are now the “property” of multinational monopolist corporations that have turned national governments against their own people. The Confederate flag flap was merely a useful distraction to trick the population using political sleight of hand to fool everyone about the real agenda being pursued in Washington.America is now officially a nation of slave workers beholden to multinational corporate interests. How does your silly flag outrage feel now?


See the complete article, with videos, here.

Meanwhile, back in Australia, what similarities do we see?

Here are two opinions –

TPP secretly trading away your rights – Consumer rights and …


Mar 2, 2015 – In this report, we investigate the TPP and the impact it will have on your … “The Trans-Pacific Partnership undermines Australian efforts to take …

The TPP has the potential for real harm – The Drum … – ABC

Mar 15, 2015 – The Trans-Pacific Partnership expected to be signed in the coming … And this could cost Australians dearly if our negotiators fail to protect our rights. … Ian, no mention of the implications to the environment in your piece.


Attempting to ascertain where we currently stand as to “signing up”, it appears an agreement has been reached but not ready for final signing until some time in the future. (Ref http://trademinister.gov.au/releases/Pages/2015/ar_mr_151105.aspx)


As for distractions – besides the Paris “climate change” meeting, we could include the Paris “terrorist” incident, which for some strange reason is seen as a reason for extra government concern and action, action more likely to promote disharmony in Australia than to create a peaceful outcome. (http://nsnbc.me/2015/11/24/turnbull-warns-of-increased-terrorism-threat-in-the-region-ignores-state-sponsorship/)

There appears much to be learned and think about.


Posted in AGENDA 21, AUSTRALIA, Globalism, New World Order, Politics, World Issues | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

“Conversations: Climate change is happening” Part 5.

This post is directed at the ABC News (Aus), ‘Drum Opinion’ post of the same name! Ref: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2761976.html

The foregoing comments in previous parts apply to funding and other influences.   It is also appropriate to iterate that addressing one side of an issue is not “clearing up the debate “, which is why this blog is attempting to address the “other side”.

CLEARING UP THE CLIMATE DEBATE: Director of the Global Change Institute, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg submits some climate “sceptics” to peer-review and finds them wanting.

Looking at the fundamental aspect of ‘peer review’, where, as Ove points in his paper:

Peer review is the basis of modern scientific endeavour. It underpins research and validates findings, theories and data.

Submitting scientists’ claims to peer review is a straightforward way to assess their credibility.

It stands to reason that the peer reviewing, in order for it to be meaningful, would be done by other qualified scientists, preferably in the same science field, who would thoroughly understand the work, and who would critically examine it, consider it’s accuracy, agree that the methods, experiments and conclusions were scientifically sound, and who would ask questions and get feedback from the author where appropriate.

Selecting a peer reviewer who is associated with the project, or the author, or has some other connection or vested interest, or known pre-disposition to agree with the work would lessen the credibility of the review, or even negate it.

The Climate Commission was established by the Australian government to help build consensus around climate change.

Comment; admitted agenda to build consensus “around ? “climate change””.  No study, no debate, no consensus, no science, no impartiality, funded by the government!

Peer-reviewed by internationally respected scientists, the report summarises key evidence and conclusions regarding climate change for Australia and the world.

May have been peer-reviewed, but no acknowledgement of same, either the reviewers or any reviewing notes.

Rising temperatures, changing rainfall, threats to human health and agriculture, and deteriorating ecosystems are carefully documented from the scientific literature. The report makes compelling reading and a solid case for rapid action on greenhouse gases such as CO2.

This is Olave’s comment, an assessment that I venture to query in respect of his agreement with “rapid action on greenhouse gases such as CO2”. From a technical point of view, the implied justification for a carbon tax which relates to CO2 but not to other, perhaps more important, GHG’s, is not supported.

Now we come to a rejection of critical  comments by some experts, who are criticised for not having peer-reviewed papers.

But is there really so much scientific dispute over the facts of climate change?

One way to resolve this is to ask a simple question. If Carter and company hold different views to those expressed in the majority of the peer-reviewed, scientific literature, then have they submitted their ideas to independent and objective peer-review?

This is a critical process that sorts opinion and rhetoric from scientific knowledge and consensus.

If the answer is “yes”, there are legitimate grounds for concern over the report’s conclusion.

If the answer is “no”, the arguments against the Climate Commission’s report fall away as unsubstantiated opinion.

Three comments:  Carter and company have a great deal of expertise and published material but not in journal format. Without researching this, I believe attempts to do so have been met with prejudicial denial, at least in some cases.

Such acceptance is normally taken as a sorting of “rhetoric from scientific knowledge and consensus” but it is not necessarily the case. In fact the lack of such ‘sorting’ is a claim against many AGW published papers, including the IPCC reports where peer-reviewing is, in the outside world, termed ‘pal-reviewed’.

Thirdly, the credentials of the person making criticisms are not as relevant as are the statements, which may actually be true. True peer-reviewed statements may have a better chance of being correct, one’s with agenda bias less likely so. The persons critical of AGW alarmism are not being given a chance to openly debate their case, not that an impartial arbiter could be easily found. Climate science is far from cut and dried.

Monumental, world-changing decisions are being based on this and other such documents. Governments relying on agenda-driven documents and proposals are responsible to their public and they are letting us down by being a party to unsure and possibly false science.

Carbon trading has yet to be proved necessary and the motivation has yet to be made clear to the public.

[This post is obviously not a complete, scientific treatise on the subject. It is however, a guide to the reader to indicate that the ‘warmist’ papers are not to be taken at face value. They need to be analysed and proven to be above question before acceptance, because they are agenda-driven and might cost you your lifestyle and maybe even your freedom.]

The other series articles will be addressed, in turn.

Comments on “open letter” are Part 1: “Conversations: Climate change is happening” Part 1.

Comments on “greenhouse effect” are Part 2: “Conversations: Climate change is happening” Part 2.

Comments on “alarmist AGW views justified” are Part 3:   “Conversations: Climate change is happening” Part 3.

Comments on ” the staggering ways we influence the shape of the globe” are Part 4: “Conversations: Climate change is happening” Part 4.

Posted in climate change, ENVIRONMENT, Human Behaviour, Justice, Media, Nature, New World Order, Politics | Leave a comment

Japanese & British Data Show Vaccines Cause Autism

Ken McMurtrie:

Sorry, I did say I would rest from the vaccine issues, BUT, this cannot be left any longer than necessary.
I would welcome any rebuttal of this proffered proof that there is a definite association between vaccines and autism.
Unless the research studies presented here can be reasonably refuted, I will continue to believe, and publish, that vaccines are much more dangerous than claimed and generally accepted.

Originally posted on ________________Child Health Safety_________________:

add to del.icio.us ::Add to Blinkslist::add to furl ::Digg it::add to ma.gnolia::Stumble It! ::add to simpy ::seed the vine:: ::::TailRank

Just months following the US Court of Federal Claims rejection of the claim that the MMR vaccine causes autism, here you will see data from formal peer refereed medical papers showing that vaccines caused autism in British and in Japanese children and will be doing the same to children around the world. The number of Japanese children developing autism rose and fell in direct proportion to the number of children vaccinated each year:-

[click image for larger graph in new window]


Click here on Contents for full details of the Japanese data [after our short section below on “British Data Show Vaccines Cause Autism”].

[See end of page for the above graph by annual % of children receiving MMR vaccination – still showing the same correspondence.]

For confirmation of four ways autistic conditions are caused see evidence in statements from pharmaceutical…

View original 5,881 more words

Posted in drugs & medication, HEALTH, Public Health, Vaccine Dangers, vaccines | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Vaccinations – No Unchallenged Justification for Mandatory Enforcement.

One more post on this topic and I will give it a rest. Basically an offering of my own viewpoints and conclusions.

An issue of immense ramifications, an endless number of information sources and interested parties, of major health consequences, of enormous financial outcomes and of much political significance.
There are many reasons to question many aspects of the vaccine industry and associated authorities and practices. Reasons provided by medical experts whose qualifications and experience validate their opinions. Persons without financial or political agendas, who are capable of clear thinking and logical reasoning.

A situation of “reasonable doubt” exists. Ignoring this fact is contrary to commonsense; acting in ignorance of, or in conflict with this fact, is unscientific, uncivilized and potentially dangerous to humanity.

It is suggested that there is sufficient evidence to seriously question and also to oppose the global program of enforced mandatory vaccinations, in particular the removal of logical exemptions.

From the website of CDC, ‘Centers of Disease Control and Prevention’:

Additional Facts:

Additives used in the production of vaccines may include suspending fluid (e.g. sterile water, saline, or fluids containing protein); preservatives and stabilizers to help the vaccine remain unchanged (e.g. albumin, phenols, and glycine); and adjuvants or enhancers to help the vaccine to be more effective.

Common substances found in vaccines include:

Aluminum gels or salts of aluminum which are added as adjuvants to help the vaccine stimulate a better response. Adjuvants help promote an earlier, more potent response, and more persistent immune response to the vaccine.
Antibiotics which are added to some vaccines to prevent the growth of germs (bacteria) during production and storage of the vaccine. No vaccine produced in the United States contains penicillin.
Egg protein is found in influenza and yellow fever vaccines, which are prepared using chicken eggs. Ordinarily, persons who are able to eat eggs or egg products safely can receive these vaccines.
Formaldehyde is used to inactivate bacterial products for toxoid vaccines, (these are vaccines that use an inactive bacterial toxin to produce immunity.) It is also used to kill unwanted viruses and bacteria that might contaminate the vaccine during production. Most formaldehyde is removed from the vaccine before it is packaged.
Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and 2-phenoxy-ethanol which are used as stabilizers in a few vaccines to help the vaccine remain unchanged when the vaccine is exposed to heat, light, acidity, or humidity.
Thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative that is added to vials of vaccine that contain more than one dose to prevent contamination and growth of potentially harmful bacteria.

For children with a prior history of allergic reactions to any of these substances in vaccines, parents should consult their child’s healthcare provider before vaccination.

Bold emphases are mine and highlight the items that should particularly concern parents.  Even ‘antibiotics’ are questionable considering that we are trying to minimize their use because antibiotics resistance is becoming a real problem. Adding multiple doses to babies and children’s bodies has potential negative ramifications.

Insufficient or inadequate testing precludes a statistically valid basis for the industry to claim “vaccines are safe and effective”. Perhaps they may be “safe”? most of the time, “effective” most of the time, but therefore can only be correctly termed relatively “safe and effective”.

But there are genuine reasons for asking if the ‘price’ paid by some, is morally and ethically acceptable in order to achieve the “greater good”?

The claim of known recognized toxic elements contained in vaccines being only a small and insignificant risk to babies and children because they are “trace amounts” is unproven. In fact, there are substantial proofs that they are causing harm.
Harm admitted by the manufacturers and overseeing authorities, harm officially recognized in legal court dealings, harm experienced by a small but important number of families. Harm which is readily seen in the case of the HPV vaccines, harm which is scientifically challengable in both multi-vaccine doses, and administering more than one vaccine in a session.

Are the numbers of harmed individuals relatively small? Even 1 in a million is too many for that 1 case to feel justice. But there are in fact many! Many more than the official statistics take into account. It is reasonably estimated that non-recognition and non-reporting of cases make the official figures less than 10% (at best) of real cases.

Regarding the “greater good”, numerous compelling arguments dispute the necessity for vaccines in many cases, the effectiveness of the vaccines in several cases and the justification for mandatory application of vaccines in general.

Regarding the “trace amount” argument, as mentioned above, there are no authentic trial results to prove a “safe” conclusion. For some inexplicable reason(s), doses of vaccines are not regulated for babies and children in step with their body weight and they in fact receive the same as young adults. Yet doses of any oral medicines are regulated for children. Why is that so?

Also re “trace amounts”, besides being basically untested and therefore an unknown risk, scientists (some), authorities and people in general are quite happy to accept a strong “scientific” conclusion that 400 parts per million, a 0.04% trace amount, of CO2 in our atmosphere, regulates our planetary global temperature.

There is no justification for the public to be coerced into a compulsory health program without due consideration for adverse reactions, allergies, state of health or personal or religious beliefs. Any considerations of such matters are to unjustly ignore the significance of the criticisms and to discard them.

If the medical justifications are not sufficiently compelling for the vast majority of members of the public to voluntarily accept vaccinations, the reasons for the doubts must be dealt with.
Not by denial, but by data and authentic scientific studies which are above criticism. Such proofs do not exist to the degree that ethically and morally justify mandatory vaccinations.

Without any guarantee of safety (there is none!), should we accept authoritarian laws that take away parent’s rights to care for their own children?

It is mooted that adults may soon be targeted with similar mandatory vaccination requirements. That would be even greater extraordinary authoritarian behaviour from our leaders. Even less justification and even more invasive of our civil liberties!

There you have my opinions.  (Substantially supported by industry whistle-blowers and recognized professionals).

CDC http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm
Vaccine Truth http://vactruth.com/
Vaccine xchange http://vaccinexchange.org/
Natural News: http://www.naturalnews.com/
Natural Society http://naturalsociety.com/search_gcse/?q=vaccines
Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network (AVN) https://avn.org.au/
Silent Epidemic; The Untold Story of Vaccines https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1m3TjokVU4

Posted in AGENDA 21, AUSTRALIA, drugs & medication, HEALTH, vaccines | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Study: Vaccinated Children Have 2 to 5 Times More Diseases and Disorders Than Unvaccinated Children

Genuine expert information to give cause to open-minded consideration.

Mandatory vaccinations are far from fair, safe, necessary, ethical or justified.

by David Michael Augenstein
Journal of Natural Food and Health

A German study released in September 2011 of about 8000 UNVACCINATED children, newborn to 19 years, show vaccinated children have at least 2 to 5 times more diseases and disorders than unvaccinated children.

The results are presented in the bar chart below; the complete data and study results are here. The data is compared to the national German KIGGS health study of the children in the general population. Most of the respondents to the survey were from the U.S.

The data was collected from parents with vaccine-free children via an internet questionnaire by vaccineinjury.info and Andreas Bachmair, a German classical homeopathic practitioner. The website is not a pretty one (including Google ads for vaccines) but the actual data is what counts. The independent study is self-funded and is not sponsored by a large “credible” non-profit or government health organization with political and financial conflicts of interest. Each one of the 8000 cases are actual cases with medical documentation. Three other studies had similar results according to Bachmair and are reported below.

No study of health outcomes of vaccinated people versus unvaccinated has ever been conducted in the U.S. by CDC or any other agency in the 50 years or more of an accelerating schedule of vaccinations (now over 50 doses of 14 vaccines given before kindergarten, 26 doses in the first year). Most data collected by CDC is contained in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database. The VAERS is generally thought to contain only 3 to 5 percent of reportable incidents. This is simply because only some immediate reactions are reported by doctors; but many are not admitted to be reactions to the vaccine. Most importantly, the VAERS numbers are only immediate reactions, which I would place with a few hours to a few weeks. Long-term vaccine-induced diseases and disorders are not recognized by parents or doctors when these conditions develop perhaps a few months to five years or more and would never be realized to come from multiple vaccinations. In other words, many children and adults have diseases and disorders that are vaccine induced and they never suspect they are from the vaccines, as this study indicates.

– See more at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/new-study-vaccinated-children-have-2-to-5-times-more-diseases-and-disorders-than-unvaccinated-children/#sthash.qi07guUh.dpuf

Posted in drugs & medication, HEALTH, Public Health, Vaccination Dangers | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Parliament of Australia – Mandatory Vaccinations – Democrazy!

Ken McMurtrie:

A post concerning mandatory vaccinations becoming law in Australia.
This is the way our Australian democracy works – A committee is advised what the government wants and then hold an inquiry that confirms and upholds the desired end result.
Evidence of serious issues are ignored:

NO consideration of the health status of the recipients.
NO consideration for the basic rights of parents.
No consideration for the rights of the child.
NO consideration for the absence of proven safety of individual vaccines and especially that of multiple applications.
NO consideration for establishing the need for particular vaccines in different situations.
NO regard for information provided in the public submissions which were, in the committee’s own words “The majority of the correspondence received was from individuals who oppose the bill.”
So far removed from logic, science and commonsense that it points to a hidden agenda being enacted.
“Democrazy” is a more appropriate interpretation.
Not only a mockery of justice, but an insult to Australians.
How does this sound? “As part of this measure, the Government announced it would provide a $26 million boost to the Immunise Australia program ‘to encourage doctors and immunisation providers to identify and vaccinate children in their practice who are overdue’.[6]
I am interested to see how spending on enforced vaccinations can be offset by “1.21 The Explanatory Memorandum notes that the Bill is expected to produce savings of $508.3 million over the forward estimates.[21]” If this is calculated to be savings from healthier children and less work sickies, perhaps they have forgotten the health costs of dealing with adverse reaction issues which may even exceed any known-to-be-fallible and non-guaranteed benefits of vaccinating.
The committee judgment does not go unchallenged, even by its peers! “ 1.22 The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights (PJCHR) found the Bill engages and places limits on the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion as set out in article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and sought advice from the Minister on whether the measures were justifiable.[22] The PJCHR had not published the Minister’s response prior to the tabling of this report.

Conduct of the inquiry
1.2 Details of the inquiry, including a link to the Bill and associated documents, were placed on the committee’s website. The committee also wrote to 31 organisations and individuals, inviting submissions by 16 October 2015.
1.3 The committee received over 2000 pieces of correspondence related to the inquiry, which included submissions, form letters and short general statements. The majority of the correspondence received was from individuals who oppose the bill.
1.4 On 28 October 2015 the committee determined to publish the following statement on the inquiry page:
The committee has received a large volume of submissions in relation to this inquiry and wishes to assure submitters that each piece of correspondence to the inquiry is being read and considered. The committee has decided to publish all submissions from organisations and a representative sample of the submissions received from individuals. Owing to the sensitive and personal nature of many submissions, the committee has decided that the representative sample will be drawn from those for which it has received clear advice from the submitter supporting publication. The committee has decided not to publish submissions comprising short or general statements, form/campaign letters and petitions, but has noted the concerns raised in them.
1.5 The committee published 550 submissions, including 25 submissions received from organisations. The committee also published two samples of form letters. The committee considered and noted all other unpublished correspondence.[2]
1.6 The committee held a public hearing in Brisbane on 2 November 2015.

Originally posted on THE INTERNET POST:


Recommendation 1

2.88    The committee recommends that the Government consider an initial review after 12 months to assess the immediate impact of the Bill and a full evaluation of the impact and effectiveness of the Bill after three years of implementation.

Recommendation 2

2.89    The committee recommends that the Government consider the educational and communication strategies to improve vaccination rates proposed by submitters to this inquiry.

Recommendation 3

2.90    The committee recommends that the Government investigate a means of continuing to monitor conscientious objection if the Bill is passed.

Recommendation 4

2.91    The committee encourages the Government to investigate the merits of a national vaccine compensation scheme.

Recommendation 5

2.92    The committee recommends that the Bill be passed.

Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page


View original

Posted in AUSTRALIA, Politics, Vaccination Dangers | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Corrupted Australian Surface Temperature Records

Ken McMurtrie:

Just to keep the Australian scene available to the public.
A bit technical but it provides a contrast to the warmist propaganda!

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Older records may be fragile but was diligence any betterin recent decades?

Guest essay by Bob Fernley Jones

acorn-sat overview


Out of over 20,000 Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) weather stations on record [1], 112 have had their data “corrected” under a process known as homogenisation, (the acronym for it in full is ACORN-SAT). Oddly though, eight of these high quality sites, are admitted to, quote:

“…have some urban influence during part or all of their record, hence are excluded from the annual temperature analyses”.[2]

Thus only the resultant 104 ACORN site records are used to establish temperature trends and it is these that are partly reviewed herewith. Some ACORN stations are known under a single site name but are actually several different locations combined, (typically moving from in-town to the airport), and their homogenisation is partly achieved by including data trends from surrounding stations of lesser status…

View original 2,953 more words

Posted in climate change, ENVIRONMENT, Corruption, AGW, AUSTRALIA | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Climate Change Inquisition Begins

An interesting title, a post on ‘The FEDERALIST’ category “Global Warming“.

For me, this adds another opportunity to “beat my head against a brick wall”, as a friend highlighted and something of which I am constantly aware. “Brick wall” it certainly is, as is shown in this article.

Not a material barrier but one of enormous substance nevertheless.

Its main elements are political motivation; virtually unlimited funding; professional academics prepared to depart from honest scientific principles, or unbelievably unable to understand that they have departed from them; media, both scientific and mainstream, with very few exceptions, deliberately refraining from what should include a healthy proportion of investigative journalism, or even balanced reporting, an essential component of the responsibility of a public information source. Probably true to add the failure of the general public to be critical in their absorbing of information and trusting the newspapers and governments who themselves are naive at very best, or corrupt at worst.

Unfortunately, part of this mix includes unscrupulous behaviour, a distinct absence of ethics and, in too many cases, downright lies.

In case the reader is inclined to a conclusion that these opinions are the product of a raving activist, it needs to be pointed out that there exists a wealth of knowledge and evidence from a great many completely balanced, unbiased and highly educated scientists, some belonging to sound technical organizations, some individuals simply seeking honesty and justice, and a long list of internet blog sites that openly provide scientific proofs and/or hypotheses that genuinely contest much of the claimed science of the IPCC group and its followers.

The leading blog site would have to be WUWT, with their 33,000+ followers and 250,000,000 views and endless supply of meaningful information.

On my blog alone, many internet links are listed. Hundreds of posts, searchable by “AGW”, “climate change” or “global warming”, and pages in the drop-down menu header “AGW”, shows the amount of reading and research that supports the formation of my beliefs and enthusiasm for promoting a factual and unbiassed critique of the official “climate change” debacle.

Arriving at the title subject, [at last, :-) ], the justification for claiming  the existence of an ‘inquisition’. (In its strongest meaning according to https://www.google.com.au/search?q=inquisition+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=4wlEVvH9AsWOmwXGy5jADg,

“an ecclesiastical tribunal established by Pope Gregory IX circa 1232 for the suppression of heresy. It was active chiefly in northern Italy and southern France, becoming notorious for the use of torture. In 1542 the papal Inquisition was revived to combat Protestantism, eventually becoming an organ of papal government.”)

we see here the first part, “suppression of heresy” in action with the CAGW warmists branding anybody who questions their “science” and conclusions as heretics. Hopefully the “torture” stage will never be seen but coercion in the form of finance and job security does, and as in this case, some extremists propose legal action and punishment of so-called “deniers”. (BTW, another ridiculous use of a word, along with “climate change”, a term referring to an absolutely normal global phenomena, being corrupted to mean “catastrophic man-made climate influence”.  Another pathetic, unsupportable claim introduced by desperate people).

New York’s attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, has started an investigation of Exxon Mobil “to determine whether the company lied to the public about the risks of climate change or to investors about how such risks might hurt the oil business.” According to The New York Times, its sources “said the inquiry would include a period of at least a decade during which Exxon Mobil funded outside groups that sought to undermine climate science.” See what they did there? To have a different view of climate science is to “undermine” it because there is no scientific study of the climate except that which they agree with.

We should start with the observation that Exxon could not possibly have “lied” about climate change, even if it intended to, because first there would have to be a proven truth on the subject. If the company later contradicted warnings about global warming issued by scientists it funded in the 1980s, that would be justified by the fact that those warnings were almost certainly wrong. The arguments for global warming have been undercut — not by anything Exxon did — but by what the earth didn’t do. It didn’t keep warming, with global temperatures leveling off for the past 15 to 20 years. Global temperatures are now trending at or below the lowest, least dire predictions of warming.

But this isn’t really about the science, is it? To make it clear that this is entirely a political witch hunt, the Times explains that “the company published extensive research over decades that largely lined up with mainstream climatology. Thus, any potential fraud prosecution might depend on exactly how big a role company executives can be shown to have played in directing campaigns of climate denial, usually by libertarian-leaning political groups.”

Voila! Consensus!

A Bloomberg analysis describes the “weird theory” needed to transform this into a case of securities fraud but gets down to the nub of why Schneiderman is pursuing that theory: to evade the First Amendment. “[S]ecurities fraud is perhaps the least protected speech of all. Securities law fits notoriously uncomfortably with the First Amendment; the Securities and Exchange Commission forbids even truthful speech by companies in many situations.”

So there you go. This is about suppressing political speech by using the threat of government prosecution to intimidate corporations into withdrawing funding from pro-free-market advocates.

This is part of the whole “consensus” scam that is central to global warming hysteria. The idea is to make it impossible for scientists who are skeptical of global warming to receive any funding or get published in peer-reviewed journals — and then declare that, lo and behold, there are no published scientists who are skeptical about global warming! The idea is to proclaim a spontaneous “consensus” that you created by excluding anyone who disagrees with you.

The complete article is linked here.

I wonder how readers react to realizing that we live in a civilization, (by the way, nowadays a misnomer as any civility from our authoritarian leaders is often difficult to discern), that resorts to legal force to pursue a program seriously threatening peoples welfare and well-being, which is based on false premises.Featured Image -- 17552

Certainly, it is necessary to sensibly phase out the burning of fossil fuels for cheap energy generation, because they are not renewable ( a genuine consensus), but when the method becomes a tool for financial and political control, it is time to wake up to the reality of this purely politically motivated agenda.

Posted in AGENDA 21, AGW, climate change, Conspiracies, ENVIRONMENT, New World Order, World Issues | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Back to Basics Part 1 – What is Global Warming?

Ken McMurtrie:

Information needing to be understood by the public, although it is technical.

Figure 1.2-1 shows the annual global land+ocean surface temperature anomalies, based on the UKMO HadCRUT4 reconstruction, from its start year in 1850 through to 2014. Based on the linear trend, global surfaces are warming at a not-very-alarming long-term rate of about 0.06 deg C/decade (about 0.10 deg F/ decade)…for a total warming of less than 0.8 deg C (about 1.4 deg F) since 1880.”

A part of a huge amount of data supporting, scientifically, genuine criticism of the falsely-based political and financial controls being currently imposed.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Guest Post by Bob Tisdale

This is the first part of a two-part series of posts that present chapters from my recently published ebook On Global Warming and the Illusion of Control – Part 1.  The introductory post for the book is here (WattsUpWithThat cross post is here), and the book in pdf format is here (25 MB). Yes, the book is free.

The topic of this post is What is Global Warming?  The second post, to be published next week, is What is Climate Change?

1.2 – What is Global Warming?

The term “global warming” has come to mean the warming of our planet Earth (the surface, the lower atmosphere, and the oceans to depth) that has been caused by, and will be further enhanced by, the emissions of man-made greenhouse gases.  No one bothers calling it man-made global warming or anthropogenic global warming or human-induced

View original 1,509 more words

Posted in AGW, climate change, ENVIRONMENT, Science, World Issues | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment