Agmates

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is convinced the science on man made global warming is settled. In fact he’s so convinced that the science of the IPCC and NASA’s James Hansen is correct that his number 1 political priority is the introduction of an Emissions Trading Scheme by mid 2010.

The latest science shows that the IPCC’s Climate Change Modelling is grossly overstated..

Climate change may not be as severe as predicted, suggests an international study that shows current modelling of carbon dioxide emissions from soils are overestimated by as much as 20%.

The view, reported in the latest Nature Geoscience journal, is based on a study of Australian soils that finds the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) released by Australian soils is much lower than previously believed.

The finding has major implications for climate change predictions as annual carbon emissions from soils are estimated to be more than all human-made CO2 emissions combined.

The incredibly ironic thing is that one of the reports Co_Authors Dr Evelyn Krull [pictured] , is a scientist at the Australian governments own CSIRO Land and Water. Dr Krull goes on to say:

For Australia, a proportion of 20% charcoal in soils would lead to a 135 teragram (135 billion kilograms) overestimation on a continental scale.

“On an annual basis, an inflated prediction from topsoils alone equates to … 84% of CO2 emissions associated with aviation for Australia using values obtained for 2006,” the paper says.

Surprise, Surprise the research has found that climate change modelling is grossly overstated.

…this means that current scenarios predicted by climate change modeling “are making it look worse than it actually would be”.

This highlights the need for a global initiative to analyse soils worldwide for charcoal content so that modeling can be more accurate, she says.

Beautiful - the climate models are overstated. All the while Rajendra Pachauri, James Hansen, Al Gore, Tim Flannery, Don Henry , Barry Brook & Clive Hamilton of the alarmist cause try to tell us Global Warming is happening faster than the models actually predicted.

The science on man made global warming is settled. Yes right.

Also published On Crikey’s Enviro Blog “Rooted”

Have Your say!

Chairman of the IPCC Rajenda Pachauri [pictured] avoids the inconvenient truth. Sydney Morning Herald journalist Michael Duffy points this out,

Last month I witnessed something shocking. Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, was giving a talk at the University of NSW. The talk was accompanied by a slide presentation, and the most important graph showed average global temperatures. For the past decade it represented temperatures climbing sharply.

As this was shown on the screen, Pachauri told his large audience: “We’re at a stage where warming is taking place at a much faster rate [than before]“.

Now, this is completely wrong. For most of the past seven years, those temperatures have actually been on a plateau. For the past year, there’s been a sharp cooling.

These are facts, not opinion: the major sources of these figures, such as the Hadley Centre in Britain, agree on what has happened, and you can check for yourself by going to their websites. Sure, interpretations of the significance of this halt in global warming vary greatly, but the facts are clear.

Here, have a look at the graph yourself. It clearly shows its getting hotter and quicker than anyone thought?

Just as well Pachauri is a world leading scientist. I mean if he were a used car salesman and pulled a stunt like that in a sales presentation, would you buy from him?

So it’s disturbing that Rajendra Pachauri’s presentation was so erroneous, and would have misled everyone in the audience unaware of the real situation. This was particularly so because he was giving the talk on the occasion of receiving an honorary science degree from the university.

Remember, this is the Chairman of the IPCC and this is the science that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is relying on as the reason why Australia must embrace an emissions trading scheme to stop global warming?

Have Your Say!

In what can only be described as a scandalous act of deception it has been revealed that the IPCC has grossly overstated global livestock emissions.

The FAO report, Livestock’s Long Shadow, [pictured] made public last year to world acclaim, states that livestock contributes 18 per cent of the global warming effect, even more than transport.

But buried in the report is the information that deforestation - mainly in the Amazonian rainforest - is included in that figure. Without it, livestock’s contribution falls to less than 12 per cent.

.

One of the report’s main authors, Pierre Gerber, a Food Agriculture Organization of the United Nations livestock policy officer, has been openly critical of IPCC Chairman Dr Rajendra Pachauri and others, saying they had misused the information in the report.

If you recall, based on the report Dr Pachauri [pictured] an Indian Economist and Vegetarian has been campaigning for the world to eat less meat to fight global warming.

In Professor Ross Garnaut final report last week he devoted an entire section to cutting Australia’s livestock emissions, extensively quoting the trumped up 18% figure for Australia’s livestock emissions.

This is just another example of how the IPCC has distorted and misconstrue the science. Yet they still maintain credibility. This is the science that Kevin Rudd and his Labor team are relying on to set policy in Australia.

The emissions trading scheme Rudd intends to introduce in just 14 months time will cost ordinary Australians $5 billion dollars in Carbon Taxes in the first year. Based on this kind on dodgy representation of the science, it will be an abject disaster, particularly for Australian Agriculture.

.

(thanks to Agmate - Jeff)

.

Have Your Say!

.

Got a tip off, article or have you seen a video or item you’d like to be seen by the Agmates Community? If so please email it to us at news@agmates.com

Ian Plimer [ pictured ] is Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences at The University of Melbourne and Professor of Mining Geology at The University of Adelaide.

Professor Plimer is about to launch his new book

“Emissions Trading - Why Bother?“.

Professor Plimer will be speaking at the launch of the book at the Sydney Mining Club on the 6th of November if any of you are about and would like to attend.

With the Rudd Government due to launch an emissions trading regime in just 14 months time, Professor Ian Plimer will present an array of arguments that contradict the Global Warming science put forward by the IPCC, Professor James Hansen and his global spokesman Al Gore.

Some of those arguments are:

• Planet Earth has form in producing Greenhouse gases - major form - particularly from volcanic eruptions.
• The quantity of solar radiation the Sun gushes at Earth each year also varies dramatically as flares and gravitational orbit wobbles change the amount of heat we intersect.
• There are also concerns that the way we measure temperature is skewed in favour of a warming Earth.
• Against the backdrop of geological time - and our inability to distinguish any anthropogenic affects -
• Not only has the Earth endowed us with great resource wealth but also with detailed tracers of the past. The rate and amount of modern climate change is well within past variability.
• The current rate of sea level rise is low, changing sea levels is normal, sea levels can over geological time change by up to 600 metres.
• The atmospheric CO2 content at present is the lowest for millions of years. CO2 levels have been up to 25 times higher than at present yet, during the history of the planet, CO2 has not created acid oceans.
• Natural processes capture and store CO2. Planet Earth is a warm, wet greenhouse planet that has had ice for only 20% of geological time.
• Extinction of life on Earth is normal and life is most commonly stressed by cold climates.
• Temperature is buffered by the water cycle.
• Supernova eruptions, the Sun, the Earth’s orbit, tectonics and the water cycle are the primary drivers of climate.
• In the past, CO2 changes have followed temperature changes.

.

Against the backdrop of these scientific arguments Plimer poses the very sensible question, and one that Agmates has been asking: “Kevin Rudds $5 Billion Mug Punt”

.

“Why punt severe impact to Australia’s economy, and most notably the well-being of its buoyant primary producers, by volunteering the nation as a pioneer in the emissions trading concept.”

.

(more…)

London’s conservative Mayor Boris Johnson has roasted IPCC cheif Dr Rjendra Pachauri over his campaigning for people worldwide to give up eating meat to save the world from Global Warming.

.

No, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, distinguished chairman of the panel, I am not going to have one meat-free day per week. No, I am not going to become a gradual vegetarian. In fact, the whole proposition is so irritating that I am almost minded to eat more meat in response.

Every weekend, rain or shine, I suggest that we flaunt our defiance of UN dietary recommendations with a series of vast Homeric barbecues.

We are going to have carnivorous festivals of chops and sausages and burgers and chitterlings and chine and offal, and the fat will run down our chins, and the dripping will blaze on the charcoal, and the smoky vapours will rise to the heavens.

We will call these meat feasts Pachauri days, in satirical homage to the tofu-chomping UN man who told the human race to go veggie.

.

Wow another politician who tells it like it is.

Way to go Boris and you have won todays Agmates “Onya” award.

Thumbs up and “Onya” Boris.

.

Click here to see a hilarious speech given by Boris. This guy is genuinely funny.

.

Have Your Say!

.

Chairman of the UN’s IPCC Dr Rajendra Pachauri a committed vegan has called on the world to cut its meet consumption to stop global warming.

.

Dr Rajenda Pachauri [pictured] claims:

“That current global animal production is responsible for 18% of all human-induced greenhouse gas emissions - and the figure is set to double by 2050.”

.

British Cattle Producers have hit back at the Indian Global warming chief:

.

“BEEF farmers have launched a stinging attack on a climate change expert who will tonight urge consumers to abandon meat diets in favour of vegetarianism.

The UK’s National Beef Association (NBA) reacted to the speech with “disappointment, and a weary lack of surprise”.

NBA chairman Christopher Thomas-Everard said the 18% figure had long since been discredited since it was first “invented” in 2006 in a FOA report “Livestock’s Long Shadow”.

A third of the 18% was attributed in that report to the clearance of Amazonian rainforest, originally for cattle ranching and now, more commonly, for the growing of crops like soya. It was based on the peak 2004 figure of 26,000 sq km of rainforest burned.”

.

More fudged figures from the UN’s IPCC - now thats a surprise.

.

Have your Say!

.

.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd tells us that based on the science coming out of the UN’s IPCC Australia must implement a Carbon Emissions reduction scheme.

.

Kevin Rudd [ pictured at the UN]

“Well, I just look at what the scientists say. There’s a group of scientists called the International Panel on Climate Change - 4000 [2,500 actually] of them. Guys in white coats who run around and don’t have a sense of humour.

They just measure things. And what they say to us is it’s happening and it’s caused by human activity.

I am not, myself, a qualified scientist. I’m elected as Prime Minister of Australia to act on the basis of the considered scientific advice.”

.

But look what else the Chairman of the IPCC Dr Rajendra Pachauri [pictured at the top] is urging the world to do to combat global warming:

.

People should have one meat-free day a week if they want to make a personal and effective sacrifice that would help tackle climate change, the world’s leading authority on global warming has told The Observer

Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which last year earned a joint share of the Nobel Peace Prize, said that people should then go on to reduce their meat consumption even further.

Pachauri, who was re-elected the panel’s chairman for a second six-year term last week, said diet change was important because of the huge greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental problems - including habitat destruction - associated with rearing cattle and other animals.

‘Give up meat for one day [a week] initially, and decrease it from there,’ said the Indian economist, who is a vegetarian.

.

Kevin Rudd has already singled his intention to blindly follow Pachauri and his humorless men in white coats considered scientific advise.

It needs to be asked, if Rudd subscribes to the IPCC ideology, what then are his plans for the Australian Meat industry? Does he endorse Dr Pachauri’s recommendations in regard to eating less meat?

.

……………………………………………………………………………………………….

.

Have Your say!

.

New Zealand Politician Rodney Hide (pictured below) tells it like it is. Rodney is the leader of the ACT party. Yesterday he spoke in Parliament on New Zealands proposed Emissions Trading Scheme.

.

I think I will be the only person speaking in this debate [in the NZ parliament] who has any qualifications in environmental science.

It is not that that should count, but I think that it is significant for what I am about to say-that is, that the entire climate change - global warming hypothesis is a hoax, that the data and the hypothesis do not hold together, that Al Gore is a phoney and a fraud on this issue, and that the emissions trading scheme is a worldwide scam and swindle.

Enacting this legislation will cost New Zealanders dear-that is the point of it - and it will drive up the costs of basic goods and services for New Zealanders probably by at least $500 or $600 a year.

It will put businesses in New Zealand out of business, and put farmers off their farms. And it will do all this for no impact on world weather, for no environmental gain, and for no conceivable advantage to New Zealand or to the world.

.

Aren’t we hearing exactly the same thing from a few brave Australians.

Then Hide cuts loose on the science and Kevin Rudds beloved IPCC report. Remember Prime Minister Rudd is not a scientist by his own admission he just relies on THIS science:

.

That is bad, but it is the impact that this legislation and this policy will have on New Zealanders that is so truly shocking. All we have in this is a computer model. That is notoriously difficult, because the answers are written in the assumptions. Let me give members just one example.

The problem for the first two Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change reports was what was called the medieval warming period, where a thousand years ago the Earth was warmer than it is now.

Then, magically, an obscure physicist in the US came up with a new bit of analysis - the hockey stick - that showed world temperature to be flat and then rising dramatically as the world became industrialised. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change grabbed this, put it on the front of its document, and repeated it five times.

Researchers all around the world were puzzled by this, because it did not fit any of their data. Eventually they got hold of that computer model and they discovered this: any numbers fed into that model would produce the hockey stick.

We could take the Wellington telephone directory, feed it into the model that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change used in 2001, and we would get the hockey stick that saw the world running scared, that saw policy-makers running scared, and saw Al Gore make his movie based on it.

The science was rubbish, because a computer model is not science. Science is about theories, hypothesis, and the testing of these against the facts. That is not what has happened in the basic science here.

.

Wow - Rodney should come and give some of this plain speak to the Australian Parliament. I mean just a hint of distention in our Parliament gets you branded a “redneck” or a “denier” by the Rudd government and the Greens.

(thanks to Agmates reader Jeff)

.

…………………………………………………………………………………..

.

Have Your say!

.

Australia’s Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and his Labor government insist that there is a world wide consensus among scientists that climate change is caused by mankind’s emissions of CO2.

.

On the recent 60 Minutes program in arguing that Australia must act now to cut CO2 emissions PM Rudd told us that he had total faith in the IPCC and the science and that we must take action.

.

“Well, I just look at what the scientists say. There’s a group of scientists called the International Panel on Climate Change - 4000 of them…… And what they (IPCC scientists) say to us is it’s happening and it’s caused by human activity.”

.

Labor and Kevin Rudd are peddling this propaganda, when the IPCC’s house of cards is crumbling.

It is incredible that he and his Labor colleagues are using it to propose a Carbon Emissions Reduction Scheme that can only damage our economy and way of life beyond recognition.

.

Christoper Booker in Britain’s daily Telegraph writes:

.

“Among the ever-growing mountain of informed criticism of the IPCC’s methods, a detailed study by an Australian analyst John McLean shows just how incestuously linked are most of the core group of academics whose models underpin everything the IPCC wishes us to believe about global warming.

The significance of the past year is not just that the vaunted “consensus” on the forces driving our climate has been blown apart as never before, but that a new “counter-consensus” has been emerging among thousands of scientists across the world, given expression in last March’s Manhattan Declaration [see below] by the so-called Non-Governmental Panel on Climate Change.

This wholly repudiates the IPCC process, showing how its computer models are hopelessly biased, based on unreliable data and programmed to ignore many of the genuine drivers of climate change, from variations in solar activity to those cyclical shifts in ocean currents.

The idea that the IPCC represents any kind of genuine scientific “consensus” is a complete fiction.”

.

Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change

“Global warming” is not a global crisis

We, the scientists and researchers in climate and related fields, economists, policymakers, and business leaders, assembled at Times Square, New York City, participating in the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change,

Resolving that scientific questions should be evaluated solely by the scientific method;

Affirming that global climate has always changed and always will, independent of the actions of humans, and that carbon dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant but rather a necessity for all life;

Recognising that the causes and extent of recently-observed climatic change are the subject of intense debates in the climate science community and that oft-repeated assertions of a supposed ‘consensus’ among climate experts are false;

Affirming that attempts by governments to legislate costly regulations on industry and individual citizens to encourage CO2 emission reduction will slow development while having no appreciable impact on the future trajectory of global climate change.

Such policies will markedly diminish future prosperity and so reduce the ability of societies to adapt to inevitable climate change, thereby increasing, not decreasing human suffering;

Noting that warmer weather is generally less harmful to life on Earth than colder:

Hereby declare:

That current plans to restrict anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a dangerous misallocation of intellectual capital and resources that should be dedicated to solving humanity’s real and serious problems.

That there is no convincing evidence that CO2 emissions from modern industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause catastrophic climate change.

That attempts by governments to inflict taxes and costly regulations on industry and individual citizens with the aim of reducing emissions of CO2 will pointlessly curtail the prosperity of the West and progress of developing nations without affecting climate.

That adaptation as needed is massively more cost-effective than any attempted mitigation, and that a focus on such mitigation will divert the attention and resources of governments away from addressing the real problems of their peoples.

That human-caused climate change is not a global crisis.

Now, therefore, we recommend -

That world leaders reject the views expressed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well as popular, but misguided works such as “An Inconvenient Truth”.

That all taxes, regulations, and other interventions intended to reduce emissions of CO2 be abandoned forthwith.

Agreed at New York, 4 March 2008.

…………………………………………………………………………………

.

.

.

.

.

The Emperors (Kevin Rudd) New Clothes - A Fairy tale

.

Others dissenting from around the world in just the last month -

AUSTRALIAN CARBON EXPERT REJECTS CLIMATE SCARE

August 30, 2008: “Why I recanted”, by David Evans, PhD (EE), MSc (Stat), MSc (EE), MA (Math), BE (EE), BSc, mathematician, carbon accountant, computer and electrical engineer and head of ‘Science Speak’, Perth, Western Australia.

‘There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming”

.

New Report Calls into Question ‘Man-Made’ Climate Change

August 26, 2008:by By Kevin Mooney, Staff Writer, CNSNews.com, Alexandria, Virginia, U.S.A.

“The impact of solar variability is explained in a report Singer co-authored and edited in cooperation with other scientists for the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), which also claims that the mathematical models upon which the United Nations bases its “global warming” assessment are “pre-programmed” to produce results that substantiate the notion of “anthropogenic” (or man-made) global warming.”

.

IPCC’S INCONVENIENT LIES

August 18, 2008: “The inconvenient lies of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change”, by ICSC Science Advisory Board member, Dr. Tim Ball.

“The IPCC mandate is to examine human causes of climate change. However, you cannot determine the human effect if you do not know the cause and extent of natural climate change. You cannot determine the effect if you leave out major components of the climate system and make assumptions that contradict natural evidence.”

For many more articles on dissenting scientists around the world see:

International climate Science Coalition.

.

……………………………………………………………………………………

.

Have your Say!

.