Report this

00

In Australia we haven’t that amount of water available unless we tap our underground aquifers. And they are not renewable sources of water as they are not renewed by rain.

I am referring to a situation when there was an unusual heatwave in France and one of their older reactor’s wall reached 48 C
and the safety level was only 50C. They nearly had to shut it down. Maybe the newer reactors are not so heat sensitive, however in Australia. Our natural daily temps in some regions
are and can considerably reach higher than 40 C at certain times.

I wonder if you could honor us and answer this lay person’s question?

Report this

00

Obviously Australia can’t keep up with the demand, so the money goes in trade to the US of A!

We are captives in a world that says Clean energy will Save the Planet. Bulsshh. Of course if the so called purists would have their way we’d get rid of our cattle and sheep as they emit methane, (burping and farting) that dissipates anyway quickly and their manure nourishes the soil and if managed properly will reduce the need for fertilizers.

Report this

00

Report this

10

1. Dr. Stephen O. Dean, editor, Journal of Fusion Energy.

2. Dr. Tibor Braun, editor, Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry.

3. Professor Freeman Dyson of Princeton University.

4. Dr. David Whitehouse, science news reporter.

5. Dr. Benny Peiser, editor of CCN, Cambridge Conference Network.

6. Lord Nigel Lawson, Chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation and former Chancellor of the Exchequer.

7. Dr. Yurii G. Abov, editor, Physics of Atomic Nuclei (Yadernaya Fizika).

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Emeritus Professor of
Nuclear & Space Sciences
Former NASA PI for Apollo

Report this

30

I believe, Malcolm Turnbull or Turn coat, has heavily invested
in Carbon Credit trading, now the Aust government without their
ETS bill being passed, are looking at gross amounts of losses just with the rebates they have given out to people who have invested in solar panels hoping they can sell their carbon credits to others and make a profit… isn’t going to happen.

I would like in fact I have requested, my local parliamentarians
to pose the question in the Federal government. “Hands up those of you who have invested in Carbon Credits Trading Investments (that are plummeting) and ask them if this should
influence their votes endorsing ETS or Cap and Trade legislations. Maybe others could do the same?

Report this

10

While the timeline rehash is a monumental job, I would send the well publicised analysis of the climate gate emails our Australian Physicist wrote probably the best summary for your purpose.

Report this

30

Thanks for the reply.

My interest is more than just curiosity or desire to learn — I’ve become a bit of a political activist myself and I’m looking for material I might send to a few politicians who have an open mind or are leaning the right way to fight this nonsense. Nothing succeeds faster than being confronted with the truth repeatedly from authoritative sources. My saying something has very little weight by comparison.

Unfortunately this Segalstad paper is probably way above the science knowledge of most in the political world (which is our problem in the first place!).

I’ve sent the link to Joanne’s timeline to several people but it suffers from being too big and unwieldy. I asked Joanne if it could be put into text form with references for each item right with the item. She replied,

I would prefer it that way, but no, it’s not available because no one has offered to reassemble the entire chart into that format.

I wish!

It could be done, but it would be a fair bit of fiddling. I can’t do it now.

Would make a good book though eh?

So we need a volunteer with nothing to do and all day to do it. That’s certainly not me.

If you know of anything else that I can use as I propose above let me know.

Report this

20

We the so called skeptics must keep lobbying our politicians, pointing out the political agendas underlying these fraudulent scientific reports by powerful political parties including the UN IPCC reports, etc. and those that supported and supplied these reports now all found wanting and possibly very fraudulently contrived with hidden political agendas.
And supported by Carbon Trading Credits investors. Don’t forget them they are driving this AGW to get investors and dividends. They appear to be plummeting in value. Because these
ETS taxes or Cap and Trade doesn’t appear to have the support it should to support their investments and ultimately their dividends. Too tired now to give much more to this blog. God bless you, the ‘Truth will Out’ eventually.

God bless and remember ‘It only needs a few good men (and women) to do nothing for evil to … win?”

Report this

20

Like Segalstad I’m also a geologist except my area is in diamond geology and kimberlites. His analysis is basically on the mark, and it’s the misunderestanding of the CO2 cycle by the AGW people that’s the problem. Most of them have little or no grounding in the hard physical sciences, most graduating from the geography side of academia that is dominated by the social sciences.

No, you are not missing anything, and your conclusion re the IPCC is spot on.

I personally don’t think the science is based on some conspiracy but on the fact that science seems to have become disconnected from physical reality, in this case climate sensitivity. Rather than being verified experimentally, climate science assumed it to be correct, obvious, etc, and then used the scientific method to start deducing outcomes, ending up as an enormous intellectual structure that is basically a technically sophisticated belief system. This type of science is basically pseudoscience, but most of its adherents don’t realise it as they have replaced physical reality with their mathematical models, which when confronted with physical reality, such as the Trenberth “travesty” climategate email, then prompts them to suspect there is something wrong with the data, when they should have immediately questioned the theory in the first place.

That’s why there is so much acrimony between the protagonists, and one reason is that it’s old Platonists-Aristotellian argument, Plato’s followers believing truths are determined by expert discussion or dialectics, and the Atistoellians maintaining that truth is an objective fact determined by experiment.

And that’s why it won’t die quickly because it is a conflict between two world views.

Rather we should be focussing on the draft Copenhagen treaty, because when it was put up on the UN website, it had already passed a couple of rounds of governmental negotiation, and that means that the UK, Canada, Australia and the US representatives must have agreed to setting up that unelected world government modelled on the EU but based in the UN. Our bureaucrats were prepared to sign away our freedom for the specious reason of CO2 emissions.

This is where we have to take the fight to, not haggling over CO2 levels.

Report this

30