THE LAST CARBON TAXER------- Carbon cap and trade is dead in America, the Chicago emissions trading exchange has folded, click here for full story
Take the GLOBAL WARMING TEST Click Here
Carbon dioxide is necessary for life on Earth to exist and there is precious little of it in our atmosphere, Roy Spencer Ph. D. climatologist and former NASA scientist. Click on Global Warming to enter the website. This website describes evidence from Roy Spencers group of GOVERNMENT-FUNDED research that suggests global warming is mostly natural.
Carbon warming too minor to be worth worrying about. By David Evans... The debate about global warming has reached ridiculous proportions and is full of micro-thin half-truths and misunderstandings. I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, understands the evidence, was once an alarmist, but am now a skeptic. Watching this issue unfold has been amusing but, lately, worrying. This issue is tearing society apart, making fools out of our politicians. for the full story, click on Financial Post
Co2 Levels in past history, click here to go to the website for the information regarding the above chart.. So, What really is the normal level of temperature and Co2?
Sea level how much is it rising
The earth has warmed over the last 100's of years and thank goodness for that as we have come out of the last ice age, however, we have warnings that the sea level will rise by half a metre to 20 meters depending on who has said it. theroretically, according to certian people, the sea has risen as much as 20 cm in the last 100 years. how does 130 mm sound since 1841
Science is in on climate change sea-level rise: 1.7mm
Click here... In the past year, the Port Kembla gauge has recorded a sea-level rise of just 0.1mm-----CSIRO's John Church-- He noted that the BOM's gauge results for Port Kembla as published here did not include the effect of barometric pressure---The Australian continent was also rising slightly...... Guess they have to cover their tail somehow..
A person once said to me "I am carbon neutral I buy green power"... As demonstrated in the LPAC-TV video The Fraud of Free Energy, not only are wind power and solar power notoriously unreliable, they have far lower energy-density than coal, oil and especially nuclear, so they require far greater areas of land and levels of investment to produce equivalent volumes of energy, making them a backward leap to the inefficient forms of energy of past centuries.
Nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gases, but it has many drawbacks. Now a radical new technology based on thorium promises what uranium never delivered: abundant, safe and clean energy - and a way to burn up old radioactive waste. - Generation IV Nuclear Reactors. - Thorium .- Nuclear Power in India. Australia??? at least the government knows about it, I do believe, rather than being so stupid as to taxing one of the most important gasses on this planet, why not lead by example and move forward with new technology.
Australia’s Contibution to Saving the Planet
Follow Daily Temperature Readings click here
22nd June 2011
Solar Physics, an interesting subject, something that can influence our climate
The Maunder Minimum
"Early records of sunspots indicate that the Sun went through a period of inactivity in the late 17th century. Very few sunspots were seen on the Sun from about 1645 to 1715. Although the observations were not as extensive as in later years, the Sun was in fact well observed during this time and this lack of sunspots is well documented. This period of solar inactivity also corresponds to a climatic period called the "Little Ice Age" when rivers that are normally ice-free froze and snow fields remained year-round at lower altitudes. There is evidence that the Sun has had similar periods of inactivity in the more distant past. The connection between solar activity and terrestrial climate is an area of on-going research."
Typed word for word from the following site, happy reading http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml
18th June 2011
AN email sent to me
Dear Steve,
I was pleased to read your comments relating to Carbon Dioxide in the June Avacare. Attached is an email that has been doing the rounds that I imagine you have seen, but if not you would find interesting. (SEE ATTACHMENT 17th JUNE BELOW)
Other points of interest are things such as polar bears are now at record numbers (Sunday Telegraph, UK, 27th Nov 2008); each IPCC report predicting that each year will be the hottest on record and each successive year since 2001 showing the world getting colder; the findings of several hundred of the worlds leading climate scientist in 2008 at the meeting of the Non Governmental International Panel on Climate Change that did not find any significant link between climate change and human activity and noted, “it is regrettable that the public debate over climate change, fuelled by the errors and exaggerations contained in the reports of the IPCC, has stayed so far from scientific truth. It is an embarrassment to science that hype has replaced reason in the global debate over so important an issue.”
Perhaps what may eventually stick most in the minds of the public will be the realisation of the wealth such as Gore is making out of this hoax. I like the story in Christopher Booker’s –"The Real Global Warming Disaster" where he tells of how when it was found out that Al Gore’s house produced 20 times the amount of carbon of the average American house, he excused himself by stating that as a wealthy man working for the cause he needed a big house and had compensated for it by buying carbon off-sets. It was later found that he had bought the off-sets from a London based company of which he is the chairman and founder.
Is anybody pointing out to the Australian public the result of carbon trading is the Europeans and soon to be the Australians paying billions of dollars to the Chinese and Indians so that they can pollute.
What is wrong with our current government? Where on earth are they leading us in copying the worst of European policy madness?
17th June 2011
How Well Has The Media And Government Informed The Public About CO2 Levels In The Air?
Ask yourself, your friends, family and work associates if they know the answers to the following questions about Carbon Dioxide (CO2). Be sure to write your answers before looking at the following pages.
Question 1. What percentage of the atmosphere do you think is CO2?
Question 2. Have you ever seen the percentage given in any media?
Question 3. What percentage of the CO2 is man-made?
Question 4. What percentage of the man-made CO2 does Australia produce?
Question 5. Is CO2 is a pollutant?
Question 6. Have you ever seen any evidence that CO2 causes a greenhouse effect?
I have asked over 100 people these questions. Virtually everyone says they don’t know the answers so ask them to tell you what their perception is by what they have learnt from the media, the government and Green groups. Let them know there is no right or wrong answer as you are just doing a survey as to what people have perceived the answers to be from these sources.
The answers to these questions are fundamental to evaluating the global warming scare YET almost no one knows the facts. However, without this knowledge we can’t make an informed decision about whether Climate Change is natural or not.
On the following pages are respondent’s perceptions followed by the correct answers. The bulk of the respondents (over 100 to date) are educated fairly well to very well. They comprise business managers in a diversity of large and small companies, those in medical profession, accounting, law, sales, engineering as well as scientists and trades people.
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
Q1. What % of the air is CO2?
Respondent’s Answers: nearly all were 20% - 40%, the highest was 75% while the lowest were 10%- 2%
The Correct Answer: CO2 is less than a mere four 100ths of 1%! As a decimal it is 0.038%. As a fraction it is 1/27th of 1%. (Measurements for CO2 vary from one source to another from 0.036%- 0.039% due to the difficulty in measuring such a small quantity and due to changes in wind direction e.g. whether the air flow is from an industrialized region or a volcanic emission etc)
Nitrogen is just over 78%, Oxygen is just under 21% and Argon is almost 1%. CO2 is a minute trace gas at 0.038%. We all learnt the composition of the air in both primary and high school but because most people don’t use science in their day to day living, they have forgotten this. Also, the vast bulk of the population have very little knowledge of science so they find it impossible to make judgements about even basic scientific issues let alone ones as complex as climate. This makes it easy for those with agendas to deceive us by using emotive statements rather than facts. For a detailed breakup of the atmosphere go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth#Composition
Q2. Have you seen a percentage for CO2 given in the media?
Respondent’s answers: All said ’No’.
Q3. What % of CO2 do humans produce?
Respondent’s answers ranged from as high as 100% with most estimating it to be between 75% to 25% and only four said they thought it was between 10% and 2 %
.
The Correct Answer: Nature produces nearly all of it. Humans produce only 3%. As a decimal it is a miniscule 0.001% of the air. All of mankind produces only one molecule of CO2 in around every 90,000 air molecules! Yes, that’s all.
Q4. What % of man-made CO2 does Australia produce?
Respondent’s Answers ranged from 20% to 5%.
The Correct Answer is 1% of the 0.001% of man-made CO2. As a decimal it is an insignificant 0.00001% of the air. That’s one, one-hundredth thousandth of the air. That is what all the fuss is about! That’s one CO2 molecule from Australia in every 9,000,000 molecules of air. It has absolutely no affect at all.
We have been grossly misled to think there is tens of thousands of times as much CO2 as there is!
Why has such important information been withheld from the public? If the public were aware that man-made CO2 is so incredibly small there would be very little belief in a climate disaster so the media would not be able to make a bonanza from years of high sales by selling doomsday stories. Governments and Green groups would not be able to justify a carbon tax that will greatly raise the cost of everything. Major international banks and the stock market would not make massive profits out of carbon trading and many in the science community would not be getting large research grants.
Q5. Is CO2 is a pollutant?
Respondent’s Answers: All thought it was a pollutant, at least to some degree.
The Correct Answer: CO2 is a harmless, trace gas. It is as necessary for life - just as oxygen and nitrogen are. It is a natural gas that is clear, tasteless and odourless. It is in no way a pollutant.
Calling CO2 a ‘pollutant’ leads many to wrongly think of it as black, grey or white smoke. Because the media deceitfully show white or grey ‘smoke’ coming out of power station cooling towers, most think this is CO2. It is not: it’s just steam (water vapour) condensing in the air. The two large cooling towers are emitting only steam. A tiny amount of CO2 is trickling out of the thin chimney at centre. It is only barely visible due to a small quantity of smoke particles, most of which is filtered out nowadays. The media doesn’t like to show skinny CO2 chimneys emitting nothing visible because this is unimpressive and not the least bit emotive so it doesn’t make for sensationalist journalism. So they typically choose to deceive the public by showing cooling towers.
CO2 is invisible: just breathe out and see. Look at it bubbling out of your soft drinks, beer or sparkling wine. No one considers that a pollutant - because it’s not. CO2 in its frozen state is commonly known as dry ice. It is used in camping eskys, in medical treatments and science experiments. No one considers that a pollutant either. CO2 is emitted from all plants. This ‘emission’ is not considered a pollutant even though this alone is 33 times more than man produces! Huge quantities of CO2 are dissolved naturally in the ocean and released from the warm surface. This is not considered a pollutant either.
Q6. Have you seen any evidence that CO2 causes a greenhouse effect?
Respondent’s Answers: Most did not know of any definite proof. Some said they thought the melting of the Arctic and glaciers was possibly proof.
The Correct Answer: There is no proof at all. The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (the IPCC) has never produced any proof. There are, however the following proofs that it can’t cause a greenhouse effect.
• It is true that CO2 can absorb heat a little faster than nitrogen and oxygen but it becomes no hotter because it cannot absorb anymore heat than there is available to the other gases. This is against the laws of thermodynamics. All gases share their heat with the other gases. Gas molecules fly around and are constantly colliding with other gas molecules so they immediately lose any excess heat to other molecules during these collisions. That’s why the air is all one temperature in any limited volume.
• Even if CO2 levels were many times higher, radiative heating physics shows that it would make virtually no difference to temperature because it has a very limited heating ability. With CO2, the more there is, the less it heats because it quickly becomes saturated. For a detailed explanation go to: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
The following facts show that even high levels of CO2 can make almost no impact on heating the atmosphere.
1. Glasshouses with high levels of CO2 - hundreds of times higher than in the air to make plants grow faster – heat up during the day to the same temperature as glasshouses with air in them. This is also true for bottles of pure CO2 compared to ones with air.
2. The planets Venus and Mars have atmospheres that are almost entirely CO2 (97%) yet they have no ‘runaway’ greenhouse heating effect. Their temperatures are stable.
3. The geological record over hundreds of millions of years has shown that CO2 has had no affect whatsoever on climate. At times, CO2 was hundreds of times higher, yet there were ice ages.
4. In recent times when Earth was considerably warmer during the Roman Warming and the Medieval Warming, the higher temperatures then were totally natural because there was no industrialization back then.
• Water vapour is 4% of the air and that‘s 100 times as much as CO2. Water vapour absorbs 33 times as much heat as CO2 making CO2’s contribution insignificant. But like CO2, water vapour also gives this heat away to air molecules by contact (conduction) and radiation, thereby making the surrounding air the same temperature.
• The Earth’s atmosphere is very thin so its heat is continually being lost to the absolute coldness of outer space (-270 C). As there is no ‘ceiling’ to the atmosphere, surface heat cannot be retained. The Sun renews warmth every day.
Over the last few years Earth has had much colder winters due to very few magnetic storms on the Sun. These four increasingly colder winters have been particularly noticeable in the northern hemisphere where most of the land is. Because of this, the Arctic has re-frozen and glaciers that were receding are now surging due to the heavy snow falls. The Arctic showed some melting around its edges from the mid 90s to the mid 2000s due to the very high level of solar storm activity at that time. But as the Sun is now entering probably 2-4 decades of low solar activity, this is expected to cause global cooling. For more detail, see the following page.
The climate has always been naturally cyclic and variable due to numerous natural drivers of which CO2 is not one. Over millions of years the climate has shown far greater changes in the geological record than we have seen over the last 200 hundred years - and there was no industrialization back then. The very minor variations we have witnessed over the last 100 years have all occurred several times even in that short period. Today’s changes in climate are common and completely natural. There are now over 50 books that provide numerous reasons why man-made global warming is false.
The Effect of the Sun on Earth’s climate... It has long been known that the Sun is by far the major driver of all weather on Earth because it is the source of all heat and energy. There is absolutely no real-world evidence that the temperature has continually risen as we were led to believe. The hottest records in the USA and Greenland were in the 1930s due to a strong solar cycle. It became cooler from 1940 to 1970. This was due to a weak solar cycle. It has again become increasingly colder since 2006 due to another weak solar cycle. The Sun’s magnetic storm activity has now moved to an extended minimum so the next 2-4 maximums are expected to be much weaker than the last few have been. By 2011 the solar cycle should have risen half way back to its 11 year maximum but it hasn’t! It’s only just started. The last time the Sun acted this way was during the Dalton Minimum from 1790 to 1830 which produced 40 years of very cold winters with subdued, wetter summers globally - just as we are expiring now. From 1450 -1750 a more intense Maunder Minimum occurred which caused the Little Ice Age. The next 2-4 solar cycles will very likely be low in solar activity causing noticeably cooler global temperatures for a few decades.
For details see: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/02/solar-cycle-24-update
and http://www.climatechangedenier.com.au/climate-change/another-dalton-minimum/
The effect of the current Solar Minimum is particularly obvious in the northern hemisphere where increasingly colder winter temperatures have caused massive snow falls disrupting transportation across Europe, Asia and the US.
Despite more than a decade of continual doomsday predictions of increasing temperatures and never-ending drought globally, the opposite has happened. There have been lower temperatures globally with greatly increased rain and snows over much of the planet since 2006. This has caused floods across most of Australia and most other counties, as seen on the TV news. This ended the global 10 year drought conditions from the mid 90s to the mid 2000s. There has been no drop in CO2 to cause this: in fact, CO2 has risen. There is no correlation between CO2 levels and climate. The reason CO2 levels have gone up a little is most likely due to the surface of the oceans warming very slightly during the later half of the century and therefore releasing a little CO2. (The oceans are currently cooling very slightly.) Mankind’s contribution to CO2 is so small it’s not measurable.
Polls on Climate Change
Polls in western countries now show that believers in man-made global warming are now in the minority with a sizable percentage of over 20% who “don’t know” if CO2 is causing any change. The obvious change to a cooler, wetter climate combined with the revelations of climate fraud shown by the Climategate emails has led to the change in public perception. Polls asking people what is the most important threat to them out of a list of 20 issues, place global warming at the bottom!
Popular beliefs are not fact
The bulk of the population of the western world believed that the 2000 Bug would destroy much of our technology on New Year’s Eve 2000 yet not one disaster occurred anywhere. We were told CFCs caused the Ozone ‘hole’ yet after billions of dollars were spent removing CFCs over 30 years, the slight depletion of Ozone at the South Pole has not changed. Scientists now think it is natural. Popular beliefs are often based on blind faith, ideology and profit rather than proven scientific evidence. History is littered with popular consensuses that were wrong.
A Carbon Tax
Taxing CO2 achieves nothing for the environment; in fact, it deprives real environmental issues from receiving funds. A carbon tax will have a disastrous impact on lower and middle income earners. Even if drastic measures were imposed equally on all countries around the world to reduce the total human CO2 contribution by as much as 30%, this would reduce total CO2 by an insignificant percentage. It would have no affect whatsoever on the climate but it would totally destroy the economies of every country and dramatically lower everyone’s living standards. Most people and politicians are making decisions emotively, not factually about a complex science they know virtually nothing about.
Gregg D Thompson
Climate Researcher
Astronomer
Environmentalist
Author of two science books
Business Manager and Director of 3 companies
Author of science magazine articles
Designer and project manager of special effects attractions
Nature photographer
Has a great interest in most sciences
Loves creating innovation in art
29th March 2011
I had a request sent to me to be at a rally to support a carbon tax, my responce
The blind leading the blind, no thanks, I am not that silly to help destroy common sense, placing a tax on one of the most important gases on this planet, carbon dioxide, is the most hideous idea ever invented just to enrich the government with income.
Will a carbon tax change climate, no, it is a cost shoved by industry onto the end user, they will pay, standards will drop, quality of life will not be sustainable.
Temperature precedes carbon dioxide change, al gores two charts on temperature and carbon shows that when put directly on top of one another, yes, temperature drops before carbon does and rises before carbon levels do.
Question. Why is it now called Climate Change instead of Global Warming.
Answer. The planet has not warmed up any more since 1998 yet carbon levels still rise proving al gores charts correct, does this mean that temperatures can drop before Carbon levels change, yes in fact according to some, it has cooled by .6 of a degree, this depends on who's data you use.
Question. Is carbon dioxide a dangerous gas.
Answer. No, it is vital plant food
Why. Without carbon dioxide there would be no plants, no oxygen, no life. Plants can survive without animals/humans BUT we cannot survive without plants.
Question. Of all the air around us, how much is human caused carbon dioxide.
Answer. On a scale 1 kilometer long, I believe it would measure around a hair line thickness.
Sustainability “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Carbon dioxide, plant food, gives greater yields in crops, better food supplies for the sustainability of an ever growing population.
19th January 2011
Chinese New Year – Queensland Floods Fundraiser
J P Cosmos Culture & Arts Association, together with Year of China in Australia, are proud to present the “Middle Kingdom Festival Sydney”. Joining us is the Sydney Conservatorium of Music and the University of Sydney, along with a very special concert from China, Chang An Drum & Wind Music Ensemble - a “living fossil” of Chinese Ancient Music.
Proceeds from this year’s Chinese New Year 2011 concert, presented by Hornsby RSL and Year of China in Australia Inc., will be donated to the people severely affected by the floods in Queensland and Northern NSW. Chang An Drum & Wind Music Ensemble will present a special guest performance at Hornsby RSL. It is our honour to invite you as a VIP guest to attend this “Chinese New Year – Queensland Floods Fundraiser” at Hornsby RSL.
Please help us to help the flood victims of the worst natural disaster in Australia’s history, by sending this massage to all of your friends and associates, and encouraging them to purchase tickets to this event. Tickets are available on the Hornsby RSL Club’s website or via the following link:
- Tickets: http://hornsbyrsl.iwannaticket.com.au/event/event-Mjcw or call 9477 7777. Alternatively, you may call Linda Chen to reserve your VIP tickets.
- Venue: Hornsby RSL Club, 4 High Street Hornsby
- Date: Sunday, 13th February 2011
- Time: 3.00pm
- Contact: Linda Chen - 0400 763 138 - linda.nst@optusnet.com.au
- RSVP: 1st February 2011
- Tickets: $20pp, $15 for 10+ tickets, $12 for 20+ tickets
We appreciate your support for those affected by the flood disaster, and look forward to seeing you and your friends at this event!
Sincerely, Norman Li, Dennis Yan, Executive Chairmen, Year of China in Australia & Mario Machado The General Manager, Hornsby RSL Club
13 January 2011
In response to two items in the Advocate 6th Jan 2011 (opinion)
First. In response to the word Sustainability.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia “Achieving sustainability will enable the Earth to continue supporting human life as we know it.”
Sustainability dictionary, yes dictionary, “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
While it is true, not all dictionaries have every spoken word in them, it is indeed possible & quite simple to use the Internet to Google words such as Sustainability where one can find some 1000 plus websites on the subject.
As to the Sustailability awards mentioned by Nick Berman, go to the Council website, type in sustainability awards (use search up the top, towards the right of the screen) to find the information.
For senior people who do not have the computer skills to do this kind of research, there are computer classes for seniors available, try Computer Pals Hornsby 9476 8555.
Hope this simple information is of some help in understanding Sustainability and its importance.
Second. disappointment in pool closure
Below is a extract of a response I sent to a disappointed resident just before Christmas..
“As for the pool, we all were surprised as to the need to close it, we were originally told that the pool should last till 2012. Unfortunately, the last inspection was not good. We were told that the number of people in the pool must be limited, same with the number of people allowed near the stand. As for the stand, well, that is sort of out of use and the pool might last till around August 2011, NO guarantees.
Could you imagine a school carnival and half way through a race, bang it collapses..... The outcry... Why didn't you close it earlier?????????????????
I could not live with that and yes I have been concerned, one more day to go and I will feel better. People can complain all they like but it is better to put up with that than the alternative.”
I must point out that Hornsby Council started the ball rolling to replace the pool back in the previous Council term. At that time it was thought that it could last till around 2015, before it became 2012. As for those residents who think it was closed for financial reasons, you are wrong, it was not a financial reason to close as we were back in the Black financially before the decision was made.
As for not wanting to vote for Councillors at the next election who voted to close the pool, I also hope that you never vote for a Councillor who would be willing to put your life or any child’s life in danger. Safety Must Come First.
Steve Evans
Have a great day
|
