Trigger warning:

This site may, in fact always will contain images and information likely to cause consternation, conniptions, distress, along with moderate to severe bedwetting among statists, wimps, wusses, politicians, lefties, green fascists, and creatures of the state who can't bear the thought of anything that disagrees with their jaded view of the world.

Feb 27, 2010

From "Yes Minister meets Alice in Wonderland."

This is an excerpt from an article in The Age by Myles Peterson, which has created a buzz in Australia.

Midway through last year I was head-hunted by the federal Department of Health and Ageing to write speeches for their ministers - a surprise as I had no experience or qualifications. As far as the department was aware, my limited skills were derived from reviewing video games for The Canberra Times.

Perplexed and amused, I dusted off the suit and attended my one and only interview. ''I'll be writing speeches for who?''

''Minister Roxon,'' answered my interviewer.

''And you're going to pay me how much?''

''Eighty thousand a year. Will that be enough?''

So began my journey down the public service rabbit-hole. I would soon learn that swine flu and a raid on staff by another department were to thank for my recruitment. …

I was given my first speech to write. ….

Around the same time a section meeting was called. Our boss arrived late, but in the best of moods. ''We're under budget!'' she announced proudly. The old-timers let out whoops of joy.

''What's going on?'' I asked someone quietly.

''We're under budget,'' they replied with a rare smile.

''Oh, so that's good? You've saved money?''

''No, no,'' her smile turned to ash as she gave me that pitying look I usually received when I asked a question. ''It means training.''

Our section was under-budget by hundreds of thousands of dollars, necessitating we blow all the unspent money before the end of the financial year. Unfortunately, ''training'' did not mean I would finally get some training. ''Training'' consisted of hastily booked, dubiously relevant conferences and courses, most of which were conveniently located a long way from Canberra.

Despite my short length of service, I was included in the spending free-for-all. I later found myself in a plush Sydney harbor side hotel with hundreds of dollars in unnecessary travel allowance - everything, including meals, flights and accommodation, was covered by the department. I was attending a conference on Web 2.0, a topic I was mildly interested in but which had nothing to do with my duties.

The rest of the office also enjoyed jetting around the country. Four staff members managed to book into the same four-day public relations event and, reportedly, a great time was had by all.

We were not the only ones wasting money. Associated with our section were those boffins who create public health campaigns, the ones that appear on television with increasing regularity: nights out turning into nightmares, measure your fat stomach, wash your hands - that kind of thing.

I was surprised to discover the minds behind these campaigns were not health professionals. They had backgrounds and degrees in marketing, communications and advertising, not medicine. Under their watch, the government became the No.1 spender on free-to-air television.

Next to those folks sat the print division. They produced hats, T-shirts, mugs and golf balls with little logos and slogans designed to make us all healthier. A huge collection of the stuff was proudly displayed in a dedicated glass cabinet in the middle of their section. …

My lone back-up was a grizzled old press secretary left over from the Hawke era who would sometimes proof my work and harangue me for my attempts at an apolitical tone.

''But we're not meant to write political copy,'' I objected.

''Pigs arse! Tens of years of neglect under the Howard government. Use it.'' I liked him. He was snide and he was cynical and his proofing was the only help I received, for which I was very grateful.

My duties were expanded to include press releases and alerts, the organisation of ministerial visits and, my least favourite job, ringing up grouchy news editors to ensure they knew a minister would be in their town. Much of it duplicated work already done by the ministers' personal staff and the editors were usually sick to death of our calls, emails and faxes - as they let me know in no uncertain terms. …

I received my first scolding from Roxon's office and it was thoroughly deserved. I signed off on a press release that contained two glaring errors. The only excuse I had - ''Sorry, sir, I have absolutely no idea what I'm doing'' - was not going to fly, so I just swallowed my pride and apologised.

None of these events prepared me for what happened next. After remaining silent on the issue for many months, the Prime Minister suddenly took an interest in the nation's health. I found out when a grim-faced boss herded us all together. ''The PM is going to make a health announcement and you have to organise it,'' we were told. ….

That is how the department's major reform initiative, YourHealth, and its associated round of public consultations began. My colleagues (except the boss, who disappeared) worked through the weekend to pull it together. The following Monday morning I found myself standing near the Prime Minister, trying to nod gravely as I had seen other human backdrops do, while he outlined the findings of the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission's discussion paper, titled A Healthier Future For All Australians: Final Report, and the action the government would take to deal with it. The action of consultation. …..

Along with the tidal wave of events we suddenly had to organise, I was given a new duty: ensuring photographers were always present to capture our ministers nodding gravely as they consulted. There was no limit to the cost. Fortunate photographers around the country suddenly found themselves hired, whatever quote they supplied.

My last days at the department were a cavalcade of new staff, swept up from wherever they could be found amid the chaos generated by the YourHealth steam train. …

During that time I received my one and only official piece of feedback - out of the blue, my contract was extended.

After four months, I walked away and did not bother telling anyone why. ….

Myles Peterson is a Canberra writer.

The full article can be found here and is well worth the read though quite angering.

Solar Panels - another Silly Roof Scheme.

Cartoon; by Nicholson.

By Viv Forbes; Chairman, the Carbon Sense Coalition.

The Carbon Sense Coalition today called for the immediate suspension of another of Mr Garrett’s silly roof schemes – the Roof Solar Panel Scheme.

“This scheme is driven by the Renewable Energy Target Scheme, Renewable Energy Certificates and obligations on power companies to buy the inconsistent dribbles of electricity produced by solar panels on domestic homes.”

The Chairman of Carbon Sense, Mr Viv Forbes, said that like the roof insulation scheme, the Roof Solar Panel Scheme was dangerous, ill planned and a massive waste of community funds.

“There are two aspects of electricity demand.

“First is base load demand, which is present 24 hours a day, every day. However, sun power is maximised for only a few hours around noon and fluctuates with the seasons. Thus solar panels cannot replace even one iota of base load generating capacity. Coal, gas, hydro, nuclear or some expensive power storage system must sit there, ready to supply 100% of base load demand every night and on all cloudy days. Any storage facility must be large enough to cope with several consecutive cloudy days.

“The second power consideration is peak load demand, which tends to occur around meal times, night and morning. Solar panels contribute nothing at these times either.

“Therefore every dollar spent on roof solar panels duplicates capital already spent on conventional power generation – ie community capital is wasted. And the more panels, the more waste.

“Roof solar panels also induce householders into danger.

“Even quite small amounts of dirt, dust, bird droppings, tree leaves or suicidal kites will dramatically reduce the electricity generated by a solar panel. Someone must climb onto the roof to clean the panel. Inevitably, someone will fall off.

“Solar power is not free. Whilst the sunshine is free, it can only be harnessed by the construction, collection, distribution, maintenance and replacement of solar panels and transmission lines, which are not free. Solar power is an expensive option that will always need taxes or hobble-chains on competitors, support from taxpayers or coercion of consumers to survive.

“Surely our parliament cannot be so negligent as to allow rock singers and lawyers to pretend that solar playthings have the reliability, capacity and safety to provide any useful contribution to the future energy needs of our homes, cities, trains, factories, mines and farms?

“If solar panels are so good, consumers will buy them without coercion and subsidies. In reality they are a dangerous waste, so why should other consumers and taxpayers be forced to fund such folly?

“Places like Germany and California have learned to their dismay that massive stimulation of the solar power industry has done three unwelcome things. It has driven up electricity prices, driven away other industries and stimulated the manufacture of solar panels in foreign lands, mainly China. And unless it is propped up by conventional power generation, the inevitable consequence will be network instability and blackouts.

“Solar energy is useful for solar hot water systems, for power in remote locations, for small installations with battery backup and for growing plants. It is not useful for generating electricity for modern power grids.

“The Roof Solar Panel Scheme should be suspended immediately and an independent enquiry made into its engineering and financial feasibility.”

Petition on the Flawed Carbon Trading Scheme.

Liberal MP, Dr Denis Jensen, has drawn up a petition on the Flawed Carbon Trading Scheme. 3,447 people have signed so far.

The Big Picture on World Temperature Swings.

Jo Nova has published a set of graphs produced by David Lappi, an Alaskan Geologist.

This does not look like dangerous global warming. In fact the big picture looks more like long term cooling.

Tampering with the Temperature Records

Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts have produce a masterful analysis of the state of the world instrument temperature records that have been used to support the claims that the world has warmed alarmingly since man started using large quantities of carbon fuels.

What they found was evidence of widespread systematic tampering with the surface thermometer records which has had the effect of skewing the data in order to create or exaggerate warming trends. They found cherry picking of sites included in the calculations, elimination of sites showing cooling trends, distortion caused by urban heating around recording stations, unexplained adjustment of data and divergence from the satellite temperature records (which started in 1980).

Their chief conclusions are:

· Instrumental temperature data for the pre-satellite era (1850-1980) have been so widely, systematically, and uni-directionally tampered with that it cannot be credibly asserted there has been any significant “global warming” in the 20th century. 

· All terrestrial surface-temperature databases exhibit very serious problems that render them useless for determining accurate long-term temperature trends. 

· All of the problems have skewed the data so as to greatly overstate observed warming both regionally and globally.

Chief Warmist Surrenders.

Faced with the above and other fast mounting evidence, Professor Phil Jones of CRU, who is at the centre of the “Climategate” affair and a key promoter of the Global Warming Scare, has conceded that there has been no "statistically significant" rise in world temperature since 1995. Professor Jones also conceded, for the first time, that the world may have been warmer in medieval times than it is now. (Sceptical scientists have long argued that the world was warmer between 800 and 1300AD than at present).

Big Business gets Nervous

The collapse of the so-called Consensus, the failure of the Copenhagen Climate Confab, the emerging evidence of the foolishness of wasting tax payers funds on wind/solar “power” and ethanol production, the Climategate Scandal, the roof insulation fiasco in Australia, the Carbon Credit frauds, the lack of evidence to support the weekly scare forecasts and the rapid change in public opinion is having an effect on big business support for the Global Warming Scam. Straws in the wind include:

· BP, Conoco Phillips and Caterpillar and have all withdrawn from the US Climate Action Partnership.

· The Australian Industry Group, previously a firm supporter of the Ration-N-Tax Scheme, now says there is “no clear way forward” and AIG has to rethink its position. 

· Peabody, the world’s biggest coal company, has lodged a detailed submission opposing the US EPA’s classification of carbon dioxide as a pollutant.

None of them has yet challenged the whole scientific basis for the Global warming Scam, but the continuing exposures of IPCC incompetence and fraud is raising concern at the top end of town. We part-time grey beards, young Turks and eloquent ladies who have stood in the front line for so long need to keep gathering troops and ammunition for the big battles yet to come. Soon there will be a flood of desertions from enemy ranks and more allies will start to appear.

George Will speech at CPAC.

Brilliant and witty speech here by George Will. He really ridicules the Obama administration - "They can envision a world without the internal combustion engine, but not one without Chrysler."

He also has a few words to discomfort those who fondly remember the Bush administration through rose colored glasses. While it is hugely important to toss out the present lot, and any sort of objective reality makes it clear that only the Republicans are in a position to do this, it would be tragic if the Party fails to recognize that their own stupidity and big spending, big government policies were a significant part of what cost them the election.

There is not much point in changing a bad government for one that is little, if any better. The Republicans have a lot of work to do if they wish to get the fiscal conservatives, and the socially tolerant libertarian element out to vote in November. To achieve this there will have to be genuine changes in attitude, philosophy, policies, as well as the removal of some of the Parties big spending elitists.

You cannot rely on the Democrats to do it all for you.

Feb 26, 2010

Truth problems at IPCC

The following is a part of a list of fraudulent claims on GW compiled by Mark Landsbaum in the Orange County Register.

At your next dinner party, here are some of the latest talking points to bring up when someone reminds you that Al Gore and the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won Nobel prizes for their work on global warming.

ClimateGate – This scandal began the latest round of revelations when thousands of leaked documents from Britain's East Anglia Climate Research Unit showed systematic suppression and discrediting of climate skeptics' views and discarding of temperature data, suggesting a bias for making the case for warming. Why do such a thing if, as global warming defenders contend, the "science is settled?"

FOIGate – The British government has since determined someone at East Anglia committed a crime by refusing to release global warming documents sought in 95 Freedom of Information Act requests. The CRU is one of three international agencies compiling global temperature data. If their stuff's so solid, why the secrecy?

ChinaGate – An investigation by the U.K.'s left-leaning Guardian newspaper found evidence that Chinese weather station measurements not only were seriously flawed, but couldn't be located. "Where exactly are 42 weather monitoring stations in remote parts of rural China?" the paper asked. The paper's investigation also couldn't find corroboration of what Chinese scientists turned over to American scientists, leaving unanswered, "how much of the warming seen in recent decades is due to the local effects of spreading cities, rather than global warming?" The Guardian contends that researchers covered up the missing data for years.

HimalayaGate – An Indian climate official admitted in January that, as lead author of the IPCC's Asian report, he intentionally exaggerated when claiming Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035 in order to prod governments into action. This fraudulent claim was not based on scientific research or peer-reviewed. Instead it was originally advanced by a researcher, since hired by a global warming research organization, who later admitted it was "speculation" lifted from a popular magazine. This political, not scientific, motivation at least got some researcher funded.

PachauriGateRajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman who accepted with Al Gore the Nobel Prize for scaring people witless, at first defended the Himalaya melting scenario. Critics, he said, practiced "voodoo science." After the melting-scam perpetrator 'fessed up, Pachauri admitted to making a mistake. But, he insisted, we still should trust him.

PachauriGate II – Pachauri also claimed he didn't know before the 192-nation climate summit meeting in Copenhagen in December that the bogus Himalayan glacier claim was sheer speculation. But the London Times reported that a prominent science journalist said he had pointed out those errors in several e-mails and discussions to Pachauri, who "decided to overlook it." Stonewalling? Cover up? Pachauri says he was "preoccupied." Well, no sense spoiling the Copenhagen party, where countries like Pachauri's India hoped to wrench billions from countries like the United States to combat global warming's melting glaciers. Now there are calls for Pachauri's resignation.

SternGate – One excuse for imposing worldwide climate crackdown has been the U.K.'s 2006 Stern Report, an economic doomsday prediction commissioned by the government. Now the U.K. Telegraph reports that quietly after publication "some of these predictions had been watered down because the scientific evidence on which they were based could not be verified." Among original claims now deleted were that northwest Australia has had stronger typhoons in recent decades, and that southern Australia lost rainfall because of rising ocean temperatures. Exaggerated claims get headlines. Later, news reporters disclose the truth. Why is that?

SternGate II – A researcher now claims the Stern Report misquoted his work to suggest a firm link between global warming and more-frequent and severe floods and hurricanes. Robert Muir-Wood said his original research showed no such link. He accused Stern of "going far beyond what was an acceptable extrapolation of the evidence." We're shocked.

AmazonGate – The London Times exposed another shocker: the IPCC claim that global warming will wipe out rain forests was fraudulent, yet advanced as "peer-reveiwed" science. The Times said the assertion actually "was based on an unsubstantiated claim by green campaigners who had little scientific expertise," "authored by two green activists" and lifted from a report from the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group. The "research" was based on a popular science magazine report that didn't bother to assess rainfall. Instead, it looked at the impact of logging and burning. The original report suggested "up to 40 percent" of Brazilian rain forest was extremely sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall, but the IPCC expanded that to cover the entire Amazon, the Times reported.

PeerReviewGate – The U.K. Sunday Telegraph has documented at least 16 nonpeer-reviewed reports (so far) from the advocacy group World Wildlife Fund that were used in the IPCC's climate change bible, which calls for capping manmade greenhouse gases.

Follow the link above for the rest.

Feb 15, 2010

“Understanding the Ruddy ETS.”

By Viv Forbes: Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition

The Carbon Sense Coalition today claimed that the Emissions Trading Scheme proposed for Australia and now before the Australian Parliament was far more than “A Great Big New Tax”.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that PM Rudd’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme combined a Big New Tax with a War-Time Rationing scheme and an Income redistributing compensation scheme, all to be run by a regulatory army probably bigger than our real army.

He continued:

“Let’s try to understand this Ruddy ETS.

“To simplify things, let’s look at just the electricity industry.

“If Rudd’s ETS ever rules Australia, companies producing electricity from carbon fuels must beg, buy or borrow a permit to burn coal, gas or diesel.

“They can beg a free permit from some mate in Canberra; they can buy a permit from some lucky sod who managed to get more permits than he needs; they can borrow a permit by entering into some tricky derivative trade with a speculator in Chicago; or they can pay carbon credit penance to a shifty land owner in some foreign land who promises solemnly not to clear his trees.

“No matter which option is chosen, power costs will go up and companies must pass the extra cost (plus GST) onto their customers or go broke.

“There will be no effect on climate.

“Now look at consumers.

“The ETS must push up the cost of all goods and services using carbon fuel. It will boost the cost of electricity, food, transport and travel. When this happens, consumers will suddenly understand the ETS Tax and politicians who voted for it will feel their anger.

“But there is a plan: “Let’s compensate all those likely to vote for us”.

“If these subsidies work properly, the lucky consumers will be in the same position as they were before ETS, except for the extra bureaucracy. For these consumers, there is no signal to reduce their consumption of carbon fuels. The ETS will do nothing except create a tangle of red tape which consumes and redistributes wealth.

“But for the un-subsidised consumers, the ETS is an extra tax on everything.

“And for the power companies, the ETS will produce nothing except a heap of angry customers, and lots of red tape.

Mr Forbes claimed that Tony Abbott was wrong about the ETS.

“It is not just a Great Big Tax.

“It’s a Great Big Tax PLUS a mountain of Red Tape.

“And it will have absolutely no effect on world climate.”

Monckton Tour

There has been a tremendous public response to the tour by Christopher Monckton and Ian Plimer. Every function packed out, people turned away, and sustained standing ovations in many places.

Because of the number of disappointed people, two more functions have been organised hurriedly.

Public Opinion

This response of the public shows that politicians of all parties are, as usual, lagging public opinion. The public have had a gutful of green propaganda and vested interests masquerading as science. A recent Australian poll shows that only 33% of Australians now support the Rudd Ration-N-Tax Scheme. And in Britain, only 26% now believe in man-made global warming. See:

Even the BBC and now the ABC have discovered that “The Science is not settled”. And the BBC’s huge vested interest in promoting climate alarmism is revealed. Their eight billion pound pension fund is heavily invested in the Climate Change Industry.

It is more important than ever to prevent Australia being left like a shag on a rock with the only lonely Ration-N-Tax Scheme in the Pacific Rim.

Keep the heat on the politicians, and watch how they vote. We need to work actively for the removal of EVERY politician from EVERY party who votes for the destruction of Australian industry on a bunch of manufactured scare stories.

Viv Forbes is Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition which opposes waste of resources, opposes pollution, and promotes the rational and sustainable use of carbon energy and carbon food.

Feb 12, 2010

Jims New Toy

"Never ask a man what sort of computer he has, if its a Mac he's already told you. If its anything else, why embarrass him?" - Tom Clancy.

I have been a bit inactive here since I got home and the photo on the left is the reason why.

Its not really a toy but hell, I'm having fun with it. There is some frustration as well, mostly due to my amateur status but I think I have successfully got all the files on the desktop that I wanted on it, across.

I really needed it for work as I seem to be in the office more and need it for the paper trail that involves.

It will be great to finally be able to keep up with my mail while I am down there. Hell, I can even blog on the job, (Just kidding Mal.)

Feb 11, 2010

The Tebow Ad.

We are unfortunately becoming used to seeing the sort of report that follows, in this case it is from “Rasmussen Reports,” and blandly covers an issue which is becoming all too frequent in this age, the denial or attempted denial of free speech. It seems that as governments have become bigger and with better technology have been able to intrude into more aspects of our private lives, the public have tended to become more politically motivated and doctrinaire in their views.

The result is that where in the past issues were debated intelligently, there is an increasing tendency to pursue the idea that views, dissenting from the ‘current truth’ be banned. This is not entirely new, the KKK, fascists, comos, religious extremists, and such like were supporters of this line but now it has unfortunately, become mainstream. The current controversy is about the following advertisement:

The ad was prepared by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family and features Tebow, a star footballer and his mother, who talks about the difficulty she had when she was pregnant with Tim and how a doctor advised her to consider an abortion. The pro-life message then notes that the child she chose not to abort went on to win the Heisman in 2007 and lead his team at Florida to two national championships.

It is difficult to fault this ad. If anything it is simply an effort to persuade the pregnant to consider other options to abortion. We are all entitled to present our views peacefully in any forum where people listen. Authoritarians however disagree.

Liberal activists and pro-choice (but only one choice) groups including Planned Parenthood and the National Organization for Women have strongly protested CBS’ decision to run the advertisement. At least one activist has threatened the network with legal action. The controversy has generated a great deal of attention for the ad.

Planned Parenthood and the National Organization for Women have a right to disagree with the content of this ad even though it is essentially none of their business, being simply a commercial transaction between consenting parties. They are not in any way denied the right to present their own views on the same forum if they are prepared to pay for it. The idea of legal action is bizarre.

Advertisements seem to be a favorite target of the more extreme elements in society who seem to imagine that the rest of us are putty in the hands of unscrupulous manipulators who force us to eat unhealthy foods and engage in other activities which offend their puritanical tastes. As result we are increasingly seeing attempts to ban them.

Apparently owing to an increasing incidence of obesity it is argued that after a fourteen hour day, it is not in my interests to be aware that I can get a seven and three quarter pound mactripple bypass burger with large fries and a supersized thick shake for $6.99 on the way home. I feel I should have the right to know what’s on offer and make my own decisions.

Attacks on free speech are harmful to all of us. The denial of the right to present certain views skews thinking in the direction of those who for whatever reason are able to acquire the political pull to have their bigotry and stupidity enforced. The fact is that the need to ban debate on an opinion probably indicates that such an opinion is a stupid one which cannot stand up to the cold light of reason.

There were calls for the banning of statements by Sheikh Hilaly after his ridiculous rant about women being to blame for being raped. The man has by his own statements been thoroughly discredited and is now seen as a laughing stock. Were he unable to make those statements he would still be considered credible owing to his idiocy not being exposed.

Feb 8, 2010

“Time to go on the Offensive.”

Moving Cattle at Helen Springs, NT. Will cities get their food using Solar Powered Road Trains?

By Mr Viv Forbes, Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition.

Like the British Eighth Army in North Africa in the 1940’s, climate realists have been in continual retreat since the Climate War started.

Led by Al Gore’s trained regiments using Nobel prize gunpowder, backed by academic and government snipers using manipulated temperature data, financed by endless convoys carrying tax payer funds, reinforced by a steady barrage of scare forecasts from the media and legislative carpet bombing from pliant politicians, the Green Army looked invincible.

But suddenly the tide turned.

What started with the Climategate scandals was followed by the defeat of the Ration-N-Tax Scheme in the Australian Senate and the defeat of the IPCC in Copenhagen. Then we had the IPCC fraud regarding Himalayan glaciers and the serial failures of the weather forecasts from the alarm-promoting British Met Office. Now data manipulation scandals are unfolding in USA, New Zealand and Australia.

And finally, with the sound defeat of a key Obama Senate candidate in USA, we are seeing the end of the climate equivalent of the long Battles of El Alamein.

We hope Churchill’s comment is apt today:

“Before Alamein we never saw a victory.

After Alamein we never saw a defeat.”

We must not relax after these small victories. In Australia, the Rudd/Wong/Turnbull Axis will never surrender. Already there is talk that the Greens, supported by Turncoat Liberals may allow the Ration-N-Tax Scheme to pass in the Australian Senate.

It is time to go on the offensive.

What can we do?

We must alert people in politics, business, government, media and the unions that they face a revolt of their supporters, shareholders, consumers, customers, employees and staff if they provide uncritical support for the global warming agenda. Specifically:

We must tell every politician who votes for any legislation based on the disgraced propaganda from the IPCC that he/she will be relentlessly punished in pre-selections, elections and fund raising. Let them know that we will actively work to replace them with more rational politicians and parties. 

There is a political sea change coming and those politicians and parties who do not switch in time will be swept out with the tide. (David Cameron, the green “leader” of the UK Conservative Party has just discovered that his new candidates rank “climate change” as their lowest priority. His future is now insecure.)

Warn business interests hoping to profit from the global warming gravy train that determined people will derail that train. Any company relying on political support, price subsidies, market mandates or carbon taxes to provide the profit stream from investment in artificial industries like carbon trading, carbon credits, wind farms, solar power, carbon sequestration or bio-fuels must be warned of the very substantial risks to such investments. 

Write to the directors of every such company. Spell out to each director the risk of shareholder legal action or sudden withdrawal of political support for such reckless speculations. Directors should ensure that the investment merit stands up without political cosseting, because the political supports will surely be kicked out in the cleanup to come. 

We must warn union leaders that they should expect a revolt from their members when the hidden costs of the global warming agenda start hitting their jobs and pockets. 

We need to protest to headmasters and their masters whenever we see global warming scare campaigns being used to brainwash our kids and grandkids. Let’s see some facts and evidence presented impartially. Let’s demand that Goreist propaganda be removed from the curriculum.

In the MEDIA.
Let the media know there is a constituency out there for climate realism and carbon sense. Put the heat on the green media heartland in places like the ABC and the Age. Do not buy or support alarmist media. Let the world know that you support rational journalists and publications. 

Warn those academics and bureaucrats who produce scare forecasts on demand that they will be called to account for the damages they have caused. They also risk facing accusations or charges for fraud or misrepresentation. 

Take the lead from people like Peter Spencer and use every weapon available against those who destroy or confiscate assets with changes in coastal zoning laws, bans on development, bans on clearing weeds and regrowth or sterilisation of farms and grasslands with declaration of political parks and non-development areas.

This battle will be international and Australia, Canada and United States are key battlegrounds. …

“Rudd – Promising Poverty or Blowing Hot Air?”

The Carbon Sense Coalition today claimed that Australian PM Rudd was either promising poverty for his grandkids or blowing hot air.

The Chairman of Carbon Sense, Mr Viv Forbes, said that in Copenhagen, PM Rudd advocated cutting production of carbon dioxide by at least 20% by 2050.

“However, back in Canberra, PM Rudd says Australia’s population will increase from 22M now to 36M by 2050.

“A bit of simple maths shows that he thinks our grandkids can exist on just half the carbon energy per person that we use now.

“But the PM also promises a nation building program of rail, road, and port construction. What fuels are all these new vehicles going to use? Is he expecting nuclear powered trains, solar powered trucks and wind powered bulk carriers?

“The Copenhagen Rudd is promising a poverty stricken future for our grandkids. Or maybe the Canberra Rudd is just a lot of hot air.”

Read Dr Walter Williams on the Global Warming Religion.

For a good summary of the Global Warming Debate listen to John Coleman of the Weather Channel.

For the unfolding story on how temperature records have been manipulated worldwide to enhance the Global Warming story see here.

Finally, make sure you swell the crowd at one of the Monckton-Plimer meetings around Australia.