A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper




The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX


This is line-ball. Australia stands on the edge of the trading abyss

Any member who passes ETS legislation under the current circumstances,  will be seen as negligent

I am fortunately only one degree of separation from an Australian Senator. The word I hear today is there is a very real chance we could lose this fight for common sense in Parliament this week. This comes despite the verification that climate science is corrupt and based on bullying, irregularities, hidden data, and artificial adjustments.

Please people, let as many senators as you can hear your point of view. They are getting messages and it does have an impact.

“The party rank and file are on fire about this,” says one anti-ETS frontbencher. “You should see the emails I’m getting on a daily basis.” [The Australian].

Thanks to John W and to the Climate Sceptics Party, I have received two lists of Senators email addresses. See below.

A mass of emails will dent the belief of someone who is convinced, and increase the confidence of those who understand the situation but face a wall of intimidation to point it out. Please support the brave Senators and members who have stood up to the bullies.  Senator Minchin (his blog), Senator Bernardi (his blog), Senator Boswell (his blog), Senator Joyce (his blog) and Senator Fielding (tagged stories, his blog), Senator Back (recent speech) and Senator Adams (recent speech).

Senator Penny Wong (see below for her email, tagged posts) is the Minister for Climate Change.

Please be brief and polite. I suggest something along these lines:

Dear Senator,

Climate science has been corrupted. With the release of documents from one of the worlds leading climate research units, the lack of integrity is profoundly disturbing. It’s clear researchers have been hiding data, fudging the results, deleting files and operating in collusion to prevent sceptical results being published.

Any senator who passes ETS legislation under the current circumstances,  will be seen as negligent.



If any java-whizz out there can create a button that emails all the senators at once I’m very keen to see it!

Email the Australian Senators:

Senator Abetz

Senator Adams,

Senator Arbib,

Senator Back,

Senator Barnett,

Senator Bernardi,

Senator Bilyk,

Senator Birmingham,

Senator Bishop,

Senator Boswell,

Senator Boyce,

Senator Brandis,

Senator Brown,

Senator Bushby,

Senator Cameron,

Senator Carr,

Senator Cash,

Senator Colbeck,

Senator Collins,

Senator Conroy,

Senator Coonan,

Senator Cormann,

Senator Crossin,

Senator Eggleston,

Senator Evans,

Senator Farrell,

Senator Faulkner,

Senator Feeney,

Senator Furguson,

Senator Fielding,

Senator Fierravanti,

Senator Fifield,

Senator Fisher,

Senator Forshaw,

Senator Furner,


Senator Heffernan,

Senator Hogg,

Senator Humphries,

Senator Hurley,

Senator Hutchins,


Senator Joyce,

Senator Kroger,

Senator Ludlam,

Senator Ludwig,

Senator Lundy,

Senator McDonald,


Senator McGauran,

Senator McLucas,

Senator Marshall,

Senator Mason,

Senator Milne,

Senator Minchin,

Senator Moore,

Senator Nash,

Senator O’Brien,

Senator Parry,

Senator Payne,

Senator Polley,

Senator Pratt,

Senator Ronaldson,

Senator Ryan,

Senator Scullion,

Senator Sherry

Senator Siewert,

Senator Stephens,

Senator Sterle,

Senator Troeth,

Senator Trood,

Senator Williams,

Senator Wong,

Senator Wortley,

Senator Xenophon,

All Australian Senators

UPDATE: Thanks to Allen Ford:;

Liberal M.P.s;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Liberal Senators;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Does this work for people? I’ve heardyou can cut n paste these lists, but it doesn’t work for me?

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)
This is line-ball. Australia stands on the edge of the trading abyss, 10.0 out of 10 based on 1 rating

Tiny Url for this post:

No comments yet to This is line-ball. Australia stands on the edge of the trading abyss

  • #

    Here is my version. It’s worth a try. Not sure the ALP senators could be swayed at this late stage, but perhaps some of the Libs could be persuaded to show some fight.

    Dear Senator,

    The science behind climate change is far from settled.

    The recent release of emails and data files from the records of one of the world’s leading climate research centres calls into question the claim that we can have confidence in the conclusions of leading climate scientists.

    These files show evidence of, amongst other things:

    - The deliberate withholding of data, the intent being to prevent replication (and presumably refutation) of study findings.

    - An organised campaign designed to suppress the publication of research papers questioning the “consensus” view of climate change.

    - Data analysis techniques which are, to say the least, questionable.

    More than anything else, the files reveal that the science of climatology is one which is still in its infancy. It lacks the maturity and depth required to make confident predictions about the Earth’s climate and its influences.

    Yet we, the Australian people, are expected to support and implement the impending ETS legislation, which you are presently considering, based on the conclusions of this immature science.

    In its current form, the ETS legislation is not only premature, but based upon the current state of climate science, totally ill-advised.

    I urge you to reconsider your support of this legislation in the Senate.



  • #

    Thank you for your ongoing fight for what is right. The rest of us also need to stand up and be counted in order to make the maximum amount of difference and to protect our future. There are many things we can do. If the rest of us can email/ring/write to our politicians Steve Fielding has linked their email addresses here;

    You can copy and paste and send them to all senators at once.

    I have a number of standard letters people can cut and past off my site if of any assistance here;

    Also its important people complain to the press and the Australian Press Council, example and links here;

    and here;

    Is as its turning out that it is simply junk science then I would think either a royal commission and or/a formal complaint with ICAC should not be out of the question considering the behavior of the current Government to rush it through with now no scientific backup – even Penny Wrong cant answer single questions over climate facts!


  • #
    Craig B

    I think we are down to the wire here. I recently contacted my local federal member, Louise Markus MP. Her office basically stated that it didn’t come down to the science. It came down to the fact that the majority of the voters believe climate change is an issue and therefore the elected members need to be seen doing something about it.

    I replied that, while understandable, this seemed to me short term populist politics. I think political decisions made on this basis are dangerous when they are irreversible. Louise Markus’ office spokesperson confirmed that ETS is an irreversible decision. Once it’s in, it will be here for good regardless of what future scientific observations are made or how public opinions poll.

    We are certainly at the edge of a historical and society altering decision here.


  • #

    Hi Craig,

    Cheer up! I don’t believe that any bad law or govt policy can be permanent. To illustrate this point I have included a Wiki link to the White Australia Policy, which was effectively made defunct in 1973. (Pretty embarassing for Austalia, huh)

    New legislation can be passed to supercede and replce existing laws.

    If the ETS does get passed, we’ll just have to try to cope with it, not get too depresed and continue fighting for truth, justice and the American way.

    BTW. I emailed all the senators on the list – hope it has some effect


  • #

    Craig, that is indeed a worry. Thanks for the info. Bruce, the difference with the white Australia policy is that there was not billions of dollars counting on the outcome.

    Once this legislation is in, it’s IN. Even if we undo it, imagine the compensation claims for lost business.

    The Australian tax payer pays either way.

    Once a carbon market is in place there may eventually “need” to be legislation about what we can say about carbon. After all – it becomes market sensitive information. Truly frightening. What if only licensed climate scientists were allowed to talk about carbon?


  • #
    Andi M.

    How 18 leading US scientific organisations wanted to influence
    the US Senate recently and what an Open Letter said :,
    good stuff for you letter!


  • #
    Matt Buckels

    don’t have to be a java wizz… if you just posted the above without the names (just the email address) folks can just cut and paste.


  • #

    Bruce “If the ETS does get passed, we’ll just have to try to cope with it, not get too depresed and continue fighting for truth, justice and the American way.”

    I think that if the ETS legislation passes on either side of the Tasman, then the best we can hope for is:
    1) the pollies are so convinced of the veracity of AGW and the ETS that they have bet their personal fortunes on it (not just the collective future of the citizens they supposedly serve), and
    2) their financial models of the ETS and their future revenues are as unreliable as the climate models and
    3) the Carbon market fails spectacularly and
    4) as a result they “lose their shirts” (and the rest of their wardrobe – scary and all as that would be).

    And if it was up to me I would not allow any of them to collect a benefit or get a tax payer hand out in those circumstances.


  • #
    John of Cloverdale WA

    “Any member who passes ETS legislation under the current circumstances, will be seen as negligent”
    Not negligent Joanne, but traitorous (giving over governance of our industry to a foreign power, the UN)and criminal (robbing the Australian people of billions of dollars to hand over to despot countries such as China).
    And all based on a failed scientific hypothesis of increasing MM emissions causing climate warming (Oops! Should I say climate change).
    CO2 increasing but global temperatures falling- hypothesis fails. But that doesn’t stop those AWG, fund receiving, fraudulent climate scientists in fudging the data.
    I’m made as hell. But what’s the use when weak Turnbull and his mob will roll over so easily.


  • #
    Daniel Cox

    Hi All,

    My wife and I have sent an email to every senator, which includes Senator Bob Brown I hope we are two amongst many.

    I have to admit that despite everything I am far from confident that rational thought will prevail and expect that the ETS will be passed.




  • #

    Daniel you didn’t really need to send it to Senator Brown, as the Greens appear to be committed to voting against the CPRS. Unfortunately only the Greens and the Nats appear to be backing their judgement of the science and sticking to their guns.


  • #

    I’ve just emailed them all.

    I believe the Greens are only against the ETS because they think it does not go far enough. They still think the science is in.


  • #
    Matt Buckels

    what is that saying about Sherlock?


  • #
    Rob Donnelly

    I am very concerned about the ETS.

    The IPCC bases its evidence on climate change on computer models.

    You test the reliability of models by their ability to make predictions.

    The IPCC computer models miserably failed to predicate a 10 year decline in global temperatures from 1998. Al Gore’s hockey stick was also incorrect.

    What NOW makes this model so reliable that a carbon tax has to be agreed to before Copenhagen?

    If the model can’t make short term predications why is the government trying to commit our tax dollars to an ETS?

    I have also emailed several Senators.


  • #
    allen mcmahon


    why is the government trying to commit our tax dollars to an ETS?

    because they will generate a massive amount of revenue from an ETS scheme.
    In any event we will have to live with the consequences of an ETS forever. Even if we changed the government and the ETS was repealed its naive to expect prices to fall.


  • #
    Helen Armstrong

    Dear All,

    I ask you to please send the letter below to ALL Australian senators in a last bid hope to defeat the ETS Bill. A 126 Billion Tax grab, giving more than 10B a year to corrupt regimes like Zimbabwe or emitters like China who will swallow up our paltry carbon saving in just 12 days. It is madness.

    Just cut and paste Senator Wong into the ‘To” line and the rest into BCC line cut out my letter above, sign and send it.

    Then forward this email to everyone you know.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Dear Senator,

    Climate science has been corrupted. With the release of documents from one of the worlds leading climate research units, the lack of integrity is profoundly disturbing. It’s clear researchers have been hiding data, fudging the results, deleting files and operating in collusion to prevent sceptical results being published.

    Australia should wait until a full investigation and recallibration of the data has been carried out before we commit ourselves to an ETS or agree to anything at Copenhagen.

    Any senator who passes ETS legislation under the current circumstances, will be seen as negligent.


    This is what I sent to all my friends – you can do the same. I also emailed all the senators


  • #

    I posted this youtube video to all the pollies today called “Hide the Decline” as a followup too my previous emails

    Don’t whether you all have seen it before


  • #

    Pleased I have found this website. I always knew that the anti climate change movement was an orchestrated campaign with no real support, and here is the proof.


  • #

    Hi Jo

    In regards too cutting and pasting those email lists. If you paste the list into the address line and then left click in the body of the email the list of email addresses should suddenly appear.


  • #

    Re copy/pasting large lists into recipient field, I sent one to all Lib MP’s and Senators a few nights ago regarding the ETS policy. 10 bounced, with the error “too many recipients”. I patiently resent to those who had mised out. (Outlook told me which they were)
    I don’t know if it was an ISP problem (mine is eftel), or perhaps MS Outlook?
    However I sent 2 separate emails today on the leadership issue, one to all MP’s, and one to Senators, and there was no problem.


  • #

    Bob, you’re not wrong :)


  • #
    david of emerald

    Do NOT CC but BCC – then only the recipients email address appears


  • #

    David of Emerald

    How do you BCC?


  • #

    Doing something about climate change requires something other than trading permission to do so. I find it extraordinary that people think an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will reduce pollution. An ETS is about trading permission to pollute, which merely permits continuation of polluting if a sufficient price is paid. Having completed a PhD inquiring into how CEOs deal with sustainability, I have seen the frustration of some business leaders with their subordinate managers who neglect to take responsible steps to eliminate pollution. Those CEOs who deal with sustainability well do one thing in common; they challenge their subordinate managers to behave in a sustainable way. We would not have to deal with this issue if we were all more responsible and less concerned with unnecessary excessive consumption. We do not to live in inappropriately large homes and have no right to wasting resources. Perhaps if we refuse to behave in a sustainable way we will deserve the consequences of an ETS, with its annual cost levied against each of us. However, having helped organisations eliminate pollution over several decades I am certain this is not necessary if we think before we consume.


  • #

    Response to Lionel,
    I suppose you are the arbiter of excess consumption and what type of home is appropriate. The whole facist atitude of the environmental movement is what gets up my nose. Lionel’s comment is full of the self rightious BS that can be expected from the greenies. The whole point of this debate is that there is no real evidence that CO2 is the main driver of climate change and, therefore, do we need to unnecessarily waste 100′s of Billions of the taxpayers money.

    The other word I find pretty meaningless is “sustainable. I have yet to see anybody define this. What if we cut our fuel use by 50%. This means we run out in 100 years instead of 50 years. Big deal. Before this time the scarcity would have forced up the price and alternatives would have become economically viable without the green facists practicing their social engineering on us.

    If you want to increase your street cred with the greenies and wear a hair shirt Lionel go ahead but I will keep my silk one.


  • #

    Cameron if you’ve never seen anyone define “sustainability” then you’ve not spent much time looking.


  • #
    Cameron H

    I have a dgree in science with majors in chemistry and physics and I have done some study in environmental engineering. I was an Environmental Manager at a major industry for many years and retired at the end of last year from my last position as the technical services and engineering manager also at a major industry. I can assure you that any “definition” that you can bring up on sustainabiltity will be big on post modernist claptrap that is usually sprouted by the likes of Clive Hamilton but short on any meaningfull substance that can be applied in the real world.


  • #
    Cameron H

    To clarify. I put my qualifications and work experience in to show that I have had many years of practical experience dealing with both Government Environmental Agencies and Green Groups. The “sustainability” idea is similar to that non concept “the precautionary principal”. Both can take on any meaning that you want to support your case, which is usually the wind back of further human economic and industrial development or figuring out new ways to gain tax revenues.

    They are also used to exclude the rigorous scientific analysis of any claims before action is innitiated to save us from some imagined potential doom.

    I believe that we are in a war with the environmental facists for our future rights and liberties. These are the enemies terminologies and should be avoided in any discussion or debates on environmental issues. I also believe that it is time to stop banging on about the science because it is no longer a scientific argument. Barnaby Joyce and the Nationals seem to be the only ones who understand this and that is why they attack the sole purpose of this issue which is controlling human activity and raising large amounts of money.


  • #

    Cameron… thanks for clarifying that your statement “I have yet to see anybody define this” was not true.


  • #
    Cameron H

    Matt, That is right. I meant to say. I have yet to see anybody define this in a way that has any meaning in the real world.