Subject: FW: Australia New Zealand Royal Commission on Global Warming
From: "Al Maynard"
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 00:42:03 +0900
To: "Peter Taylor"
On a serious note for a change – Please have a read.
Cheers, Al M
(KS-C's note: e-mail addresses contained herein have been altered to stuff the spiders so simply cut, paste and adjust to use.)
From: Viv Forbes [mailto:vforbes@bigpond.(+)com] Sent: Thursday, 31 January 2008 3:57 AM To: 'Maynard, Al' Subject: Australia New Zealand Royal Commission on Global Warming
For Al Could you please give the release below wide circulation. Send to any media contacts you have as well as members of Parliament. Feel free to use parts or all of it as the basis for your own letters to editors, ministers or members. You may find some interesting reports in the list of references at the end of the release. We may have follow-ups to this so please let me know if you find new people or organisations who may support this initiative. Regards Viv Forbes
Media Statement for Immediate Release
A group of Australian and New Zealand organisations and scientists today called on the governments of Australia and New Zealand to set up an Australia New Zealand Royal Commission on the Science of Global Warming (to be known as "The ANZIG Royal Commission" – the Australia New Zealand Inquiry into Global Warming).
The chairman of Australia's Carbon Sense Coalition, Mr Viv Forbes, said that many groups and individuals in Australia and New Zealand had listened with alarm and disbelief to plans of both governments to saddle their people and industries with the burdens of carbon taxes and the risks of carbon trading which he described as "an open invitation to massive fraud".
"We also fear the enormous costs of taxing and decimating our backbone industries of farming, mining, power generation, cement making, forestry, mineral processing and tourism and subsidising many expensive and ineffective alternate energy proposals. The very high costs to society of the actions being proposed require that we settle the science before forcing the whole ANZ community into a futile and expensive exercise to solve a problem that may not exist. 'To do it "just in case"' is not an option.
"The Australian Government has set up the Garnaut Review to look into the likely costs of various proposals for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. However, we need a parallel independent inquiry into the science to determine whether any action at all is required.
"The science is definitely not settled. Hundreds of qualified independent scientists around the world now question whether sufficient attention has been paid to the proven historical influence of natural solar cycles, and many other aspects of climate science. Since the scientific investigations for the IPCC fourth assessment report were completed 18 months ago, new research and new observations have cast serious doubt on many of the IPCC's conclusions.
"Everyone, from the highest government minister to the lowliest taxpaying consumer, must realise that unless it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt that carbon dioxide causes excessive global warming, there is no justification for imposing restrictions and costs on emitters of carbon dioxide. These burdens will pass inevitably on to the whole community, and will fall most heavily on those who can least afford them. No valid, verifiable scientific proof has yet been established. All we have are hypotheses and speculations based on computer models. Governments have a duty to create an opportunity for the full range of scientific evidence to be examined and evaluated. This can best be done by way of a Royal Commission of Inquiry," Mr Forbes continued.
"Australia and New Zealand are both heavily dependent on primary production and world trade, neither have nuclear power, and both are leaders in science in the southern hemisphere. The whole hemisphere would be very damaged by the global warming extremism of Al Gore and old Europe. Al Gore is more motivated by extreme Green politics than scientific truth while Old Europe believes that their nuclear capacity protects them from the carbon costs they plan to impose on others."
Mr Forbes said that this proposal is the joint initiative of The Carbon Sense Coalition based in Australia and the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, and is supported by individual scientists and industry representatives such as:
"We are all of the view that CO2 in the atmosphere is a benefit not a threat to humans, and there is no need to launch a massive assault on our lifestyle, industry and prosperity to solve a non problem. "We have four recommendations:
Mr Forbes said that it is clear there is growing concern among the world scientific community about the conclusions being promoted by the IPCC. "In contrast to the 2000 or so scientists who are claimed to have contributed to the IPCC (many of whom do not support the extremist political conclusions promoted by the IPCC) there are at least 20,000 scientists who have signed their names in public opposition to the IPCC. (See references below). "In addition, many organisations, think tanks and business leaders have voiced opposition to the radical proposals from the IPCC, and many more are quietly dismayed. There is no consensus about the science, even if scientific questions could be decided by a show of hands. Scientific questions are determined by facts and evidence, and this is what a Royal Commission can discover and make public. "In further support of this proposal we have appended links to various submissions made recently to the Garnaut Enquiry, and other relevant documents," Mr Forbes concluded.
Terry Dunleavy, secretary of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, comments: "An ANZ approach to this vital issue is a natural flow-on from close co-operation already existing between the two trans-Tasman neighbours. Australia and New Zealand have one of the most open economic and trade relationships of any two countries. This is based on a comprehensive set of trade and economic arrangements, collectively known as Closer Economic Relations (CER), which underpin substantial flows of merchandise trade, services, investment, labour and visitors between the two countries. Implemented in 1983, CER has already seen such joint official bodies as:
"In New Zealand, government advocates of a carbon emissions trading regime have referred to the desirability of harmonising with Australia. Surely, it is logical to first establish that there is scientific justification for the imposition of an economically burdensome carbon emissions scheme, before going down that costly track, whether together or separately. Two countries as close together as we are in so many official ways should have no difficulty in sorting out any jurisdictional complexities arising from the creation of a joint ANZAC Royal Commission to look at an issue that is so common to us both," said Mr Dunleavy. Ends 1415 words
Viv Forbes, BScApp, FAusIMM, FSIA
The Carbon Sense Coalition
0754 640 533
Terry Dunleavy, MBE, JP
The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition
tel +6494863859 (or +64274836688)
Dr Muriel Newman
New Zealand Centre for Political Research
Australian Beef Association
Executive Councilor of NSW Farmers Association