Posted by: Grant | August 13, 2014

Climate Relegated In AUSMIN Communiqué


Minister for Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop, Minister for Defence Senator David Johnston, Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel met on 12 August in Sydney for the annual Australia-United States Ministerial Consultations (AUSMIN).

Climate change only got two lines in the – 
AUSMIN 2014 Joint Communiqué
12 August 2014
Look down the bottom under “3.Global Challenges

“Recognising the challenges climate change poses to security, Australia and the United States intend to continue to work through the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change process to negotiate a new, ambitious climate agreement applicable to all countries by 2015 to take effect in 2020.”

There is also a hint of it there (“3.Global Challenges“) with “G20” and the clichés “sustainable” and “energy efficiency

“Australia and the United States plan to work together through the G20 toward achieving their shared goals of promoting strong, sustainable, and balanced global economic growth and employment, and increasing the resilience of the global economy, including by strengthening infrastructure investment, enhancing trade and building cooperation on energy, including on energy efficiency. The United States shared Australia’s ambition for G20 members to boost the collective GDP of members by more than two per cent above current projections over the next five years.”

The stark differences in attitudes on Climate Change were not mentioned – “don’t mention the war” – Basil Fawlty.

The US administration has been forced into a very soft sell, not only by India and the developing nations but by the host, Australia.

The US has been forced into the “whole world must agree on ambitious targets or it is a wasted effort” position.

Obviously a lot of people are having a lot of trouble “recognising the challenges climate change poses to security”!


Posted by: Grant | August 12, 2014

The Inconvenient Science

“All scientists agree” and “the science is settled” carbon dioxide IS a greenhouse gas – yes -


All scientists also agree and the science is also settled that carbon dioxide itself actually has an inverse logarithmic effect. The more you add the less warming you get from it.

Well, you say, why are they worried?

Simple, they are worried because they want to be worried, they claim that the small rise in global temperature caused by carbon dioxide will cause an increase in global humidity, water vapour, the Earth’s real GHG. They make that assumption in all their alarming computer models.

However, the assumption that perturbations in the earth’s temperature cause instability due to an increase in water vapour are not supported by definitive evidence. We cannot predict global temperature, but the global temperature is remarkably stable and self-regulating.
The well referenced article below goes into the science and points out -

” …The rapid logarithmic diminution effect is an inconvenient fact for Global Warming advocates and alarmists, nonetheless it is well understood within the climate science community. It is certainly not much discussed. This diminution effect is probably the reason there was no runaway greenhouse warming caused by CO2 in earlier eons when CO2 levels were known to be at levels of several thousands ppmv…. “

The diminishing influence of increasing Carbon Dioxide on temperature
Posted on August 10, 2014 by Anthony Watts  
Guest essay by Ed Hoskins

All scientists do agree that adding carbon dioxide does NOT produce a linear rise in temperature.
All scientists do NOT agree that raising the Earth’s temperature by a small amount will be amplified by an increase in the Earth’s GHG – water vapour – that is highly contentious.

Posted by: Grant | August 11, 2014

The Betrayal Of USA Working Poor

As I assert inNEW WORLD ORDER on the sidebar of this blog, the socialist revolutionaries and associated NGOs at the UN were trying to set up mechanisms for World “Governance” to save-da-planet and destroy capitalism.

They aimed to destroy western civilisation by destroying the cheap, intrinsic, electrical power generation system built up over generations.

They attacked the only demonstrated viable fossil fuel alternatives, nuclear and hydro and advocated “Renewables” which could not deliver base load power until someone invented magical solutions.

The masses, after all, are not going to revolt against their evil capitalistic masters while they have cheap electrical power in their homes and workplaces and cheap fuel for their transport systems.

Australian and European “battlers”, dismayed at the lack of a solution to an as yet imaginary problem, will empathise with the Californians in this article on how the prosperous “Left” or “liberals” have betrayed them.

The penny has dropped – environmentalism is fundamentally misanthropic or anti-human and the poor are the ones who suffer to save-da-planet.


Also here -

by Joel Kotkin 08/04/2014

Democrats Risk Blue-collar Rebellion

” …But, at least here in California, much of the working class is made up of minorities, who are increasingly the economic victims of the enlightened ones. One place to see this is in Richmond in Northern California, where a Green Party mayor and a similarly aligned planning department have tried to block the refurbishing of Chevron’s large refinery there, which is also the economic bulwark of the area.

The dispute over the refinery suggests divisions that may become more commonplace. Essentially, you have on one side overwhelmingly white, often very-affluent greens, allied with powerful Democratic politicians, arrayed to obstruct the refinery. On the other side, you have minorities, many of them union members, whose livelihoods and high-paying jobs depend on the refinery.

The incipient rift between such blue-collar workers and gentry Democrats is inevitable. The wealthy donors who dominate both local and national Democratic politics, like San Francisco hedge fund mogul Tom Steyer, may have made much of their fortunes in fossil fuels, as the New York Times, among others, have reported. But now, having embraced a stringent environmentalism, the gentry seek to impose their “green” agenda on the hoi polloi… “

Posted by: Grant | August 7, 2014

The latest Global Temperature

~meHere is a perspective of the latest global temperature.

Global temperature has been accurately measured by satellites since 1979 and this graph from the US Government CDIAC shows the cumulative carbon dioxide emissions during that period (after the red line)


This is a rare graph of the actual global temperature during that period. It is rare because the global temperature is seen as a virtually flat, straight line.


That virtually flat line can be plotted as a “temperature anomaly” graph which exaggerates the tiny variations (less than half a degree) in global temperature so we can see how much they vary from the average.


The blue graph above is NOT a measure of global temperature – it is a measure of how it varies. The El Nino spike in 1998 bumped up the average and caused the curve to float above the line. The trend before and since is essentially flat. The global temperature is remarkably stable and self regulating.

Despite an almost exponential rise in human carbon dioxide burning we see only trivial rises in global temperature during the above satellite record and virtually no change for over ten years now. Waiting, waiting, waiting….

Posted by: Grant | August 6, 2014

Japan Solar Abandoned

snow The Japanese powers-that-be discover that their small island, at a quite high latitude, crowded with 130 million people cannot even find the room to install solar panels and they do not provide base load power and are therefore no alternative to the 48 shut down nuclear power stations – DURH!!!

Future grows darker for solar energy growth in Japan
By James Topham and Aaron Sheldrick
TOKYO Tue Jul 29, 2014 10:32pm BST

Greenies should be smiled at indulgently, patted on the head, solemnly agreed with but NEVER taken seriously.

Posted by: Grant | August 4, 2014

The Billion Dollar Green Propaganda Industry Exposed


T~mehis excellent Forbes article reveals the evil multinationals manipulating the huge Leftist “Climate Change” industry.

Not so much of a problem if it wasn’t so potentially destructive in that it is aimed at destroying a vital, intrinsic, energy system (including nuclear and hydro) for which there is no demonstrated viable alternative.


Chris Prandoni
BREAKING: Senate Committee Report Details Environmentalists’ Inner Workings
Opinion 7/30/2014 @ 11:19AM 3,310 views

” …according to a new report out today by the Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW).

The EPW report titled The Chain of Command: How a Club of Billionaires and Their Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA meticulously details how the “Billionaires’ Club” funds nearly all of the major environmental non-government organizations (NGO), many media outlets, and supposed grassroots activists. The Billionaire Report continues by describing the cozy relationship many environmental groups have with the executive branch and the revolving door that makes this possible.

The most striking aspect of the Billionaire Report is the sheer amount of money that is in play. In 2011 alone, ten foundations donated upwards of half a billion dollars to environmental causes…. “

Read the original here – it is a Republican document but it contains vast, exquisite, detail that can only be produced by the huge recourses of the US public service -


Key points from the report:

• The “Billionaire’s Club,” an exclusive group of wealthy individuals, directs the far-left environmental movement. The members of this elite liberal club funnel their fortunes through private foundations to execute their personal political agenda, which is centered around restricting the use of fossil fuels in the United States.

• Public charities attempt to provide the maximum amount of control to their donors through fiscal sponsorships, which are a legally suspect innovation unique to the left, whereby the charity essentially sells its nonprofit status to a group for a fee.

• Public charity activist groups discussed in this report propagate the false notion that they are independent, citizen-funded groups working altruistically. In reality, they work in tandem with wealthy donors to maximize the value of the donors’ tax deductible donations and leverage their combined resources to influence elections and policy outcomes, with a focus on the EPA.

• Environmental Grantmakers Association (EGA) is a place where wealthy donors meet and coordinate the distribution of grants to advance the environmental movement. It is a secretive organization, refusing to disclose their membership list to Congress.

• The Obama Administration has installed an audacious green-revolving door among senior officials at EPA, which has become a valuable asset for the environmental movement and its wealthy donors.

• Former environmentalists working at EPA funnel government money through grants to their former employers and colleagues.

• Under President Obama, EPA has given more than $27 million in taxpayer-funded grants to major environmental groups. Notably, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental Defense Fund – two key activists groups with significant ties to senior EPA officials – have collected more than $1 million in funding each.

• EPA also gives grants to lesser-known groups. For example, the Louisiana Bucket Brigade received hundreds of thousands of grants under former Administrator Lisa Jackson despite challenges by state regulators over the use of such grants.

• In New York and Colorado, a pseudo grassroots effort to attack hydraulic fracturing has germinated from massive amounts of funding by the NY-based Park Foundation, as well as CA-based Schmidt Family Foundation and Tides Foundation.

• Bold Nebraska is another example of faux grassroots where a purportedly local organization is, in fact, an arm of the Billionaire’s Club. It is a shield for wealthy and distant non-Nebraskan interests who seek to advance a political agenda without drawing attention to the fact that they have little connection to the state.

• The circumstances surrounding the flow of money from 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) groups, and the likelihood of lax oversight, raises questions as to whether 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundations and charities are indirectly funding political activities.

• 501(c)(4) Green Tech Action Fund receives millions of dollars from green 501(c)(3) organizations, then distributes the funds to other 501(c)(4) groups that donate to political campaigns.

• The Billionaire’s Club knowingly collaborates with questionable offshore funders to maximize support for the far-left environmental movement

Posted by: Grant | August 3, 2014

AUS ABC “Catalyst” Bullcrap

I don’t want to see Antarctic research cut, but the greenies at “Catalyst” are doing the greenies at the Australian Antarctic Division no favours with this kind of patently absurd pseudo-scientific claptrap designed to rationalise away the growing ice cap.

Thursday, 31 July 2014
Antarctica Sea Ice

blackCircle“The winds are stronger than at any time in the last thousand years, (yeah – right!) and the reason can be partly (how much “partly”?!) traced back to climate change. The westerlies exist because of the strong contrast in temperatures between the tropics and the poles. This contrast is increasing as the tropics warm faster (but, but, the tropics are not warming faster). Adding to the effect is the huge ozone hole cooling the stratosphere above Antarctica (HUH! how does the hole in the ozone cool the stratosphere and how does that increase the westerlies – they are making this up as they go along!) Although temperatures are on the rise, (none of the weather stations on the polar icecap show any warming at all – on the contrary) for the moment, the wind influence is winning.”

You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to roll your eyes at the above claim – I mean if global warming is producing MORE ice where is the problem? And as for – wait for it! – methanesulfonic acid! – showing a decline in biological activity and therefore a decline in sea ice….


Well, yes, BTW that’s from 1950 to 1995, we see a decline.


Yes – Quote from transcript- 
“Dr Mark Curran
So it does and the recent data that since 1979, Antarctic sea ice has increased, but not to the extent of the decline that we see since the 1950s.”

LIARS – that’s not what was said – it is claimed that the metric methanesulfonic acid shows a decline in biological activity and therefore a decline in sea ice, NOT “since the 1950’s“, but from “1950 to 1995“.

The bottom line, if you dig it out from all the obfuscation, is that they are claiming that there was a 20% rise in methanesulfonic acid in ice cores from “1950 to 1995″ and only a five percent increase in ice extent (they seem to get that from an obscure claim that the satellite records have been showing an increase of 1.5% sea ice per decade) therefore VOILA!

TA DA! – a decline!

Antarctica is showing big seasonal differences and – yes you guessed it – that’s “Climate Change”

One man’s record ice extent is another man’s “Climate Change”

Fortunately this trite pap no longer gets into the mainstream, but the decision makers, masters of obfuscation themselves, immediately see this for what it is and ask each other the question – “How much are we paying these people for this” and start thinking of schools and hospitals and childcare and reform of the ABC!

This masterpiece of plausible pseudoscientific obfuscation should be studied by every student of politics 101 and taken as a warning by every student of science to get out of “Climate Change” – it is degenerate.

Antarctica Sea Ice



Posted by: Grant | July 30, 2014

German Renewables – FAIL

~meWell, they actually succeeded – succeeded in destroying the efficacy of a highly efficient, clean (the plant food CO2 is not a pollutant), power generation system, developed over decades, providing cheap power to the masses and keeping German industry prosperous.

The big problem of course is that the “Renewables” do not work. They cannot provide base load power. They are not an alternative.

The irony is that it was never going to work.
They ignored the warnings and committed to a technology which had no chance of succeeding.
The “free” energy that they collect is so diffuse that the physical size of the collectors becomes an environmental issue itself.
The wind does NOT “always blow somewhere” and solar panels at that latitude, in that climate, can only be described as idiotic.
There is NO storage system that can handle such gigantic amounts of energy and if there was it would multiply the already high inefficiency and cost by orders of magnitude to truly astronomic levels.


Posted by: Grant | July 29, 2014

A Little Glimmer Of Sanity In UK



Peter Lilley & Graham Stringer Vote Against Climate Committee’s IPCC Report
Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)

” …They added: “As scientists by training, we do not dispute the science of the greenhouse effect – nor did any of our witnesses. However, there remain great uncertainties about how much warming a given increase in greenhouse gases will cause, how much damage any temperature increase will cause and the best balance between adaptation to versus prevention of global warming.

The bulk of the main IPCC technical report recognises these uncertainties and is simply a useful compilation of the research in the field.

However, the Summary for Policy Makers is far less balanced than the report it purports to summarise.

Its headline conclusion was that “evidence for human influence has grown since AR4. It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century”. It is hard to justify that increase in confidence that CO2 emissions are dominant given that: about one third of all the CO2 omitted by mankind since the industrial revolution has been put into the atmosphere since 1997; yet there has been no statistically significant increase in the mean global temperature since then. By definition, a period with record emissions but no warming cannot provide evidence that emissions are the dominant cause of warming!

The pause in surface warming does not invalidate the greenhouse effect. But it does mean that other factors – natural variations – can be of the same magnitude as the greenhouse effect over at least a decade and a half. Since such variations are presumed to cancel out over the long term variations in the opposite direction may have contributed a significant portion of the surface warming over the previous two and a half decades…. “

Posted by: Grant | July 29, 2014

MH-17 Repercussions

The Russian economy is kept afloat by oil and gas. Will China follow the EU in not relying on them anymore?









Fast-Track Frack Licences ‘Vital To Protect Britain’
Date: 27/07/14
Tim Shipman, The Sunday Times
Paywalled – text here –

“Fracking for shale gas is to be fast-tracked because it will give Britain greater energy security and protect it from Russian aggression, the new Tory energy minister has revealed.

In an interview with The Sunday Times, Matthew Hancock said the government would make it “much quicker” for companies to get approval to drill for shale gas.

At present firms that want to frack have to wait about six months for permission through a 15-stage process. Hancock hopes to slash that in half. Calling shale the “holy grail” of energy policy, he said: “I want to speed up shale. It takes too long at the moment. We have to ensure that instead of an array of complicated permissions we have very firm but very clear rules.”

Hancock, 35, was promoted to attend cabinet as Tory spokesman on energy and business in David Cameron’s recent reshuffle. He warned that tensions with Russia following the shooting-down of flight MH17 meant Britain should seek to become energy self-sufficient.

He said: “Shale gas has the opportunity to increase our energy security, potentially to cut costs and also to reduce carbon emissions by reducing the amount of coal that we burn. Those three are the holy grail for energy policy.

“With what we’ve seen in Russia over recent weeks, the importance of an indigenous energy supply can’t be overestimated.””

Older Posts »



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 144 other followers