|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.
(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
Sent: Thursday, 31 January 2008 3:57 AM
To: 'Maynard, 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.
Media Statement for Immediate Release Thurs 31st January 2008
A group of Australian and
The chairman of
“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 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.
Mr Forbes said that this proposal is the joint
initiative of The
“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:
1. That the Australian and
2. That the inquiry be under the charge of at least three commissioners
including at least one Australian and one New Zealander, preferably well
qualified in science and able to take an objective, independent view of the
IPCC process. The chairman should be skilled in obtaining and assessing
evidence. (To ensure it has full jurisdiction in both countries, each
government may appoint its own enquiry with one or two commissioners, and a
common chairman, with meetings to be held concurrently, some in each country).
3. That the inquiry have the power and funding to initiate wide ranging
scientific inquiries into all aspects of present knowledge on climate and to
take and consider evidence on climate change and to analyse the likely effects
of currently proposed policies on reducing carbon emissions.
4. That until such an inquiry has reported, no steps be taken to
institute an emissions reduction programme of any kind in
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
• ANZSFA, the
• JAS-ANZ covering classifications and standards in official statistics;
• Ensis, a joint venture of forestry R & D.
• Negotiations to form a joint Australia New Zealand Therapeutics Agency.
Viv Forbes, BScApp, FAusIMM, FSIA
The Carbon Sense Coalition
0754 640 533
Terry Dunleavy, MBE, JP
tel +6494863859 (or +64274836688)
Dr Muriel Newman
Australian Beef Association
Executive Councilor of NSW Farmers Association
2. Submission by the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition to the New Zealand Parliament in 2006, calling for a Royal Commission:
3. Submission by The Lavoisier Society to the Garnaut Review:
4. Submission by Prof Bob Carter to the Garnaut Review, calling for a Royal Commission:
5. Submission by Howard Cozier to the Garnaut Review: See Garnaut Review website.
6. Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made global warming:
7. 20,000 scientists sign petition against global warming hysteria:
8. Over 100 Prominent Scientists Warn UN: Attempting To Control Climate Is Futile:
In 1997, fully 90% of US State Climatologists did NOT agree with the ADW Hypotheses (Quoted in Singer and Avery, 2007, 65-66)
9. Recent observations show that the world has not warmed since 1998, and 2007 is the coolest year since 2000:
10. Recent research shows the solar cycles, cosmic rays and clouds have a major effect on our climate:
Svensmark, H. and Calder, N., 2007. The Chilling Stars – a new theory of Climate Change, Icon Books. ISBN-10: 1-84046-815-7
11. It is generally agreed that if greenhouse warming was occurring, the strongest warming would be in the upper atmosphere above the tropics. Recent research shows this is not occurring, which indicates that warming is not being caused by greenhouse gases:
Douglass, D.H., J.R. Christy, B.D. Pearson, and S.F. Singer. 2007. A comparison of tropical temperature trends with model predictions. International Journal of Climatology, DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651.
12. Australian Parliamentary Enquiry. Dissenting report on Geo-sequestration:
13. Prof David Henderson: Governments are Mishandling Climate Change Issues:
14. Program for International Climate Change Conference in
15. “Climate Change Re-examined”, Joel Kauffman, 2007:
16. Lance Endersbee reported that temperature readings from 27 rural ground stations in Australia showed no sign of global warming over the 110 years of temperature records (1880 to 1990). (Endersbee, L, 2005 “A Voyage of Discovery”, Fig 142 , page 244). See also his 'Climate Change is nothing new:
The Feedjit SMEDG Visitor Map
Which one of the red squares is you?