HOT TOPICS:   Migration  |  KiwiSaver   | Home loans                                                         RESOURCES:    Economic calendar   |   QROPS fees

The comment stream

Recent comments

Reader poll

Which of the following do you think will rise the most next year?

Choices

Join the Interest community to be a registered commenter so you can:
- Edit your comments
- Avoid the CAPTCHA
- Vote on comments
Register Here

Already registered? log back in here ..

Forgotten your password? No problem! Click here

Opinion: The curse of politically engineered research

Posted in News

By Hugh Pavletich Independent housing issues commentator Hugh Pavletich talks about how the politics of climate change can be applied to urban planning in Tauranga Climategate On November 20th 2009 information was leaked from the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, casting serious doubt on climate research carried out within this institution and other institutions around the world. While the vintage media has generally not reported this event, it has erupted on the internet and led to senior researchers temporarily standing down from their positions, as investigations commence both within the institutions concerned and by others outside. Whether one accepts to whatever degree or rejects the theory of the human influence on climate, is not the major question. The central question is whether or not the researchers involved have firstly, carried out this work to professionally acceptable standards, and secondly, whether the research they have done to date can be trusted.

The Pew Research Center poll results released a month prior to the events at the University of East Anglia, found that Americans in answer to the question "Is there solid evidence the earth is warming?", found that in April 2008, 71% said yes, but that by October 2009 this had slumped to 57%. In answer to the question whether people thought warming was caused by human activity, the support over this period had fallen from 47% to 36%. The importance of this event, now referred to as "Climategate", cannot be overstated. The reason for this is because the leaking of this information from the University of East Anglia has provided a long overdue "shock" to the public regarding the dangers of politically engineered and financed research, and the risks and consequences of perverse public policy outcomes. Should those involved be found to have failed, institutions and peoples reputations will be wrecked. It is now "showdown time" for those involved with climate research. Climate research has attracted massive amounts of public (and to a much lesser extent, private) financial support, as Bret Stephens explains within this recent Wall Street Journal article "Climategate: Follow the Money". Mr Stephens of the Wall Street Journal states that last year Exxon Mobil provided some $US7 million (0.0027% of its net profits of $US47 billion) to climate research, sprinkled around a good number of institutions. In contrast however, governments have been exceeding generous with their taxpayers' money. According to this Wall Street Journal article, the European Commission's most recent appropriation for climate research comes to nearly $US3 billion, and that's not including funds from the EU's member governments. In the United States, some $US1.3 billion to NASA's climate efforts, $US400 million to NOAA's and another $US300 million to the National Science Foundation. Even the seriously stressed State of California with 12% unemployment, is piling $US600 million in to its climate research initiatives. According to the research by the HSBC, the above figures are small compared with the estimated $US94 billion that will be spent globally by Governments on "green initiatives", such as ethanol and other alternative energy schemes. That most of these schemes are likely counterproductive and in economic and social terms, destructive, appears to be beside the point. Consider for example, the impact of ethanol production on global food prices. Politically engineered research has led to perverse outcomes in many areas of our lives. As just one example, what we should and should not eat, as Tom Naughton explains superbly, within the video Fat Head (his entertaining take on climate research as an encore). Urban Planning Those involved within the urban development sector, such as the writer, have long been bombarded with politically engineered research throughout our working lives. So blatant in fact, that the writer has sometimes referred to it as "the sun rises in the west research". To illustrate the extraordinarily poor standards of local government land use research in New Zealand (common throughout the Anglo world) it is suggested the recent report Housing Stock and Housing Demand by the Tauranga City Council be read closely. With a population of slightly more than 100,000, rather amusingly, this small Local Authority is experiencing difficulty in coping with growth. Bear in mind while reading this Report, that Wendell Cox of Demographia, St Louis, Illinois, USA and the writer, authored on an unpaid basis, the first Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey in early 2005 through to the 5th Annual Edition released January this year. This Annual Survey of housing affordability is based on the very simple Median Multiple (median house price divided by gross annual median household income) and covers the 265 major metropolitan areas (regional this year in the case of the United Kingdom "“ due to that country's slow data release) of the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Much of what I have written these past five years, can be summed up within one simple paragraph:

For metropolitan areas to rate as "affordable" and ensure that housing bubbles are not triggered, housing prices should not exceed three times gross annual household incomes. To allow this to occur, new starter housing of an acceptable quality to the purchasers, with associated commercial and industrial development, must be allowed to be provided on the urban fringe at 2.5 times the gross annual median household income of that urban market. The fringe is the only supply or inflation vent for an urban market. The critically important Development Ratios for this new fringe starter housing, should be 17 "“ 23% serviced lot / section cost "“ the balance the actual housing construction. Ideally through a normal building cycle, the Median Multiple should move from a Floor Multiple of 2.3 through a Swing Multiple of 2.5 to a Ceiling Multiple of 2.7 "“ to ensure maximum stability and optimal medium and long term performance of the residential construction sector.

So the staff and elected representatives of New Zealand's Tauranga City Council, and others of course, have had five years to follow up researching and exploring workable solutions to this serious issue. The Tauranga Council Housing Report commences by discussing the Demographia Survey, but fails to note that the United States is included within these Annual Surveys. No small point - as all the "affordable" (at or below 3 times household incomes) metropolitan areas are within the United States and Canada. Indeed "“ the reason why Wendell Cox and the writer got these Annual Demographia Surveys underway, was to attempt to explain these important issues in the simplest and clearest terms possible. This small Local Authority of Tauranga in New Zealand has a problem, in that its housing has bubbled out to 6.6 times household earnings. Following the discussion of the Demographia Survey within its Housing Report, it then falls over in to a convoluted and illogical defense of its current controlling smart growth/urban intensification failures. Little wonder the recommendations are for further interventions. It is clear in reading this Housing Report, that the authors of it do not have an elementary understanding of housing market dynamics. It is not altogether surprising urban planners have a poor understanding, when it is realized that the economics profession, generally, is only now beginning to understand the real structural dynamics of housing markets as the writer explained earlier this year. The question that needs to be asked is: What do all these unfortunate examples have in common? It seems very clear that they are not being promoted to actually solve the problems or perceived problems. The answer is that those promoting these "solutions" are simply in the game of expanding their own control and influence. Protecting and expanding their empires. Nothing more, nothing less. C. Northcote Parkinson explained the reality and nature of bureaucracies, with great wit and perception within his book Parkinson's Law over half a century ago. Yet most people have little understanding of it and are "reaping the consequences". As citizens and their employers, it is our responsibility to turn the tables on the out of control political elites, so that they know clearly that their duty is to serve us. * Hugh Pavletich runs Performance Urban Planning

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment in the box on the right or click on the "'Register" link at the bottom of the comments.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current Comment policy is here.

176 Comments

I totally agree with your

I totally agree with your analysis but unfortunately the solution is through the ballot box. In the case of Christchurch City Council the same councillors, that have pursued the so-called "smart growth" policies that you rightly condemn, will be re-elected and therefore carry on along the route to ever increasing land and house prices.

Finally Climategate is completely taking

Finally Climategate is completely taking the wheels off the Warmists' fraudulent evangelism (read political Left). And now Nick Smith's ETS is looking even more reckless and irresponsible. Our ETS must be repealed: if this National Government allows it to cost one NZ citizen a single cent, then they are culpable of an outright fraud.

Great editorial in the Washington Times:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/04/global-warming-theology/...

Proper science unlocks secrets; it does not create them. The scientific method is a social enterprise and requires openness to function properly. Data must be freely available and methodologies subject to strict scrutiny in order to assess whether results can be verified, reproduced and subjected to reliability tests. There is no reason to trust any results based on hidden data and some very good reasons to distrust them. This is the gist of a prospective lawsuit against NASA by Christopher C. Horner of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which calls on the space agency to produce the climate data it has been keeping under wraps. These data are not classified information and should be part of the public record. NASA's stonewalling is suspicious and could augur that another scandal is brewing.

Global warming was an academic Ponzi scheme. Its leading proponents were mini-Madoffs, peddling a vision of global catastrophe to gullible activists, bureaucrats and policymakers. The vision was so vast, the fear it inspired so pervasive, that it seized popular imagination, aided ably by hucksters like former Vice President Al Gore and his science-fiction feature film "An Inconvenient Truth." But like any Ponzi scheme, global warming only worked if everyone kept investing and no one looked at the books. Once the truth came out - of manipulated findings, phony data, rigged peer-review processes and intimidation of skeptics - the scheme began to collapse.

Yet even as the edifice comes down, the adherents of the orthodoxy say that there is nothing to see, that this is all a distraction from the business at hand, that there is still no time to lose, full steam (or solar power) ahead. But it is far too late for that. The veil has been pierced, the myth revealed, the scales have fallen from the people's eyes. The pagan priests are fleeing the temple, their sacred idols are being pulled down, their holy works renounced. Their god, finally, is dead.

And again, someone foot trip that idiot Key before he gets on the plane to Copenhagen.

More news: Al Gore has

More news: Al Gore has suddenly canceled his appearance in Copenhagen, no reason given:

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/03/gore-cancels-personal-appear...

And the two day Copenhagen conference is going to have a bigger carbon footprint than that of the country of Morroco over the whole year of 2006.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,579071,00.html

Given Climategate, and the recklessness shown by our politicians, at the very least I would expect Green Minister Nick Smith to fall on his sword.

15,886 views on one thread

15,886 views on one thread of a very small website. Obviously this is a topic of interest:

Michael Mann Accuses Phil Jones of Mistakes
http://neuralnetwriter.cylo42.com/node/2421?page=11#comment-2428

And so the fighting starts.....

Great link Les. Our insane

Great link Les. Our insane politicians have to start looking at this issue properly. Quoting from the Daily Express article:

THE scientific consensus that mankind has caused climate change was rocked yesterday as a leading academic called it a "load of hot air underpinned by fraud".

Professor Ian Plimer condemned the climate change lobby as "climate comrades" keeping the "gravy train" going.

In a controversial talk just days before the start of a climate summit attended by world leaders in Copenhagen, Prof Plimer said Governments were treating the public like "fools" and using climate change to increase taxes.

He said carbon dioxide has had no impact on temperature and that recent warming was part of the natural cycle of climate stretching over ­billions of years.

Prof Plimer - author of Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, The Missing Science - told a London audience: "Climates always change. They always have and they always will. They are driven by a number of factors that are random and cyclical."

Nick Smith must resign. NZ's Emissions Taxing Scam must be repealed forthwith.

Preventing supernovae in space /

Preventing supernovae in space / preventing changes to the world's orbit and ocean currents : Comrades , this will necessitate far more funding than we first envisaged !

Hugh - thanks for the

Hugh - thanks for the Urban Planning / housing affordabilty formulae above, wish I'd read it before dribbling on on a thread related to first time 10 year mortgages.

Thanks also for the honesty:

"The question that needs to be asked is: What do all these unfortunate examples have in common? It seems very clear that they are not being promoted to actually solve the problems or perceived problems.

The answer is that those promoting these "solutions" are simply in the game of expanding their own control and influence. Protecting and expanding their empires. Nothing more, nothing less."

Is ignorance a possible defence?

Jon Stewart's view on Climategate

Jon Stewart's view on Climategate

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgPUpIBWGp8

I would just like to

I would just like to make a few points at this stage - and will of course come back to others you guys may wish me to comment on -

(1) K A John. Thank you for your kind comment. Its very important to work from the base that people work for whart is or what they percieve to be in their own best interest. So one should not be surprised by the REALITY that public servants generally speaking, act in their own best interest - as we do. Its very important not to moralize about this or expect them to be Mother Theresas. And please do read up whats on the web about "Parkinsons Law".

What we need to be thinking in terms of is - how do we (after all we feed them) get better performance out of them. Read my thinking in my March 2008 paper "Getting performance urban planning in place". My two faviourite words in the English dictionary are "performance" and "clarity"! This is why I call my website Performance Urban Planning,

(2) Im very sure that before too long we will all find out that the so called climate science is on a par with the brain dead drivel we read in Local Government Land Use Plans. Indeed - I see this Climategate issue as the most significant event since the fall of the Berlin Wall. The ramifications are going to be enormous - across many fields.

(3) There is just a brilliant article that has come up on the Wall Street Journal "Climategate: Science is dying" by Daniel Henninger. Gosh - I wish I could write as well as that guy! Can one of you post a link to it on this thread please?

Hugh Pavletich

A link to the excellent

A link to the excellent Henninger WSJ article that Hugh mentions above:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB2000142405274870410710457457209199373784...

One of the worse consequences of the manipulated and wrong-headed political Left inspired AGW alarmism is that it has proven to be the corruption of the peer review process, and thus, science itself.

Nick Smith must resign. Our ETS must be repealed.

Mark Hubbard - Many thanks

Mark Hubbard - Many thanks for posting the link to this extremely important Wall Street Journal article.

There is a great temptation to lash out to the Left or the environmental movement - whatever. As most will know I have worked at the coalface and hopefully learnt a few things along the way.

The core problem is the bureacracies out of control - who go out of their way to seek out groups in the community (whether business, environmental, community - whatever) to support them in their endeavours to expand control. People such as me of course - they will deliberately ignore - as what I have been advocating does not exactly help them to expand control and revenues!

Look at Australia recently with ETS. It was big business that was applying enormous pressure on the Liberal Party to adopt it - but the Liberal Party supporters had other ideas. Someone might like to provide a hyperlink to an excellent very recent article by the Executive Director of the Insitute of Public Affairs in Melbourne John Roskam - explaining the antics of big business there.

The protectionists on the right are a much bigger problem because they have the financial horsepower and will buy the political process to shut out the competition. I was President of the Property Council in the South Island during the early 1990's and had to constantly deal with these dreadful protectionists in the property industry. Indeed after about 4 years - they finally got rid of me. Guess what the issue was........yes you got it............ opening up land supply..........go to the front of the class !!!

Hugh - too many questions

Hugh - too many questions I could ask........
Must try and prove my prejudices first (joke).

So no way of opening up land then - too much vested interest. Very short sighted.

If we've anything to sell as a dream, it should be that 1/4 acre section - a good warm house at a reasonable price - surely all economic perfomance stems from not having to pay too much on the mortgage!

Thanks again.

Oh yes ... getting rid of commission based estate agency (fee only please) would have been another one of my wishes.

Of course Hugh you have

Of course Hugh you have no way of knowing what any household income is. There are distortions to most incomes by way of tax vehicles, WFF and other Govt. assistance programs,and a complete lack of any accurate measure at all of true household incomes.
Clearly the banks don't accept your point of view of incomes and they have as much information to asses then that anyone would have.
You also make the usual mistake of people quoting Tauranga. Our market is not driven by the normal working couple but is driven by retirees and farmers and professionals from other area's wanting a second property based in this area.
Having spent 15 years daily going to a number of houses each day and supplying services to those occupants I find it amusing that people that consult their computers and the records compiled by others computers in the name of research consider their findings in anyway accurate.
That Tauranga had a difficulty keeping up is due to a number of things including past lack of investment, the contortion of the landscape and its actual very small useable area, much of whats left is swamp or hilly with bits of water sticking into its mass.

It does of course have and has had for a long time now the distinction of being the fastest growing area in NZ and that despite the fact that until very recently it has been totally ignored by central Govt. We operate NZ's biggest Port and are only now beginning to get the required roading expenditure that this requires.
Due to the partisan politics of the past no Govt. of either persuasion has been inclined to support the area. Fortunately that's changing at last.

We have helped ourselves to develop the wharves, the kiwifruit industry and our roading, being the only town in NZ that has, built and paid for its own harbour bridge, its own toll roads, its own Harbour Crane and we own our Airport, used to own our own electricity companies which are now known as Trustpower.
There is not really any shortage of land here but a shortage of the willingness to expend huge sums developing it.
The more important issue in my opinion is the use of covenants by developers to establish standards within the subdivisions. For years now I have been telling people that I know in the business, that we need places for cheaper housing and housing without restrictions on the style and build. Its impossible almost to relocate an older dwelling anywhere now and I have done four. It is impossible to build a small 3 bedroom house without a garage and in a simple hardi type construction because the covenants prevent it. You cannot even build a house without the garage being part of the house. Why we want to put lumps of steel in a building at night is beyond my comprehension especially when that building has to be kitted out to living standard.
You wonder why house prices are what they are. You simply cannot find a space to build cheap starter homes. Solve that and then you will solve the house pricing issue. Not until.

Just reported on the BBC

Just reported on the BBC "UN body wants probe of email row"

CO2 MAKES UP .037% OF

CO2 MAKES UP .037% OF THE ATOMSPHERE . AT PRESCENT THERE IS APPROX 357PPM OF CARBON DIOXIDE IN THE ATMOSPHERE FOR IT TO BECOME A RISK TO OUR HEALTH IT WOULD NEED TO BE APPROX 15000PPM. AND IF ALL THE FOSSIL FUELS IN THE WORLD WERE BURNT IT WOULD STILL NOT REACH THAT LEVEL""""
BAZ

You wishful thinking conspiracy theorists

You wishful thinking conspiracy theorists are pathetic.

If the quantity of carbonic acid increases in geometric progression, the augmentation of the temperature will increase nearly in arithmetic progression.

Svante Arrhenius, in bloody 1896.

You can't explain why he was wrong.
You can't explain how thousands of people can keep a massive secret over 100 years. That's why all grand conspiracies are false. Elvis really is dead, astronauts really walked the moon, and AGW is really happening. A few selective out-of-context quotes from a vast email archive don't change that.

I'm glad you brought this

I'm glad you brought this discussion forward, Hugh. My old politics professor, Solly Patel, always asked the question: "who benefits? (cui bono)" And one of the inconvenient truths about Al Gore is his profit motive.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a7li9Nhmhvg0
But the same can be said about any socio-political issue that impacts on humanity. Governments use the "birth/death ratio" to mitigate unemployment numbers and surging home sale numbers include repos and stress sales to twist public perception. Unlike other generations, our mental capacity to think and assess has been compromised by the sheer overload of information our brains are being asked to process.
The public demands transparency to make informed decisions, but the irony is that truth is lost in the sheer magnitude of information about any given topic. No doubt, social engineers have cottoned on to this curious by-product of our internet age and feed cyberspace with an endless tableau of topic and thread, knowing in the end that we will psychically collapse under the sheer weight of it. Orwell's 1984 has surely arrived.

I agree with Robert about

I agree with Robert about the covenants - councils should be encouraging developments 'on the fringe' that have almost no covenants. But councils seem loathe to encourage 'poor' areas. When councils agree to land being developed, the developer wants to maximise his return, and wants to create these 'pleasantville' neighbourhoods where a certain class of people live. There does need to be more basic housing built, and that would probably fall in your figures of 2.5 times annual income.

Tauranga wages though are traditionally low (purely anecdotal evidence), and some work needs to be done in that area. We moved to north BOP 5 years ago from Hamilton, and my husband is still commuting to Hamilton for work. Jobs he looked at in Tauranga would be a 30% pay drop for him (for a similar job of course). He has been told that it is a trade off for the lifestyle. Thing is, lifestyle doesn't help pay the bills.

The other thing is the view that Tauranga is a 'retirement city'. A city of 100000+ people with a huge amount of industry, is far more than that, and needs to up its game more.

"The answer is that those

"The answer is that those promoting these "solutions" are simply in the game of expanding their own control and influence. Protecting and expanding their empires. Nothing more, nothing less."

That statement goes far further than just climate change or house prices...
It basically sums up the now 'God like' attitude from everything from the y2k bug, drug companies and avian /swine flu, DoC , economics, education system. local bodys, RMA, OSS...hell it now goes right thru the structure of our government, business like a virus.
And the protecting and expending is generally done by desk jockeys with very little or no experience or commonsense, only selecting convenient research and implementing in such a manner , not in the interests of the Country or citizens, but expansion of their careers and salaries.
The comment above sums up all the thesis's and research into Stupidity over the last hundred yrs or so
Google stupidity Wells also links in posts a week ago

Go 'Scouser' from UKIP: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcdJwxmdd

Go 'Scouser' from UKIP:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcdJwxmddrc&NR=1

This is cool too:

http://www.youtube.com/user/bstill3#p/f/13/xzSzItt6h-s

Cool? Oh, right, that's the problem.

A sad thing about this apparent fraud and corruption is the probability of causing demotivation for legitimate care of our environment. We don't need that anymore than we need suspect science, that's led to an even more suspect ETS.

guys, I've never been fully

guys, I've never been fully convinced on climate change but nor do I dismiss it outright - I think the jury is still out.
I keep an open mind. I don't think this scandal debunks climate change at all - it is certainly damaging to the institution concerned though.
after all certain skeptics have had embarrassing biased agendas revealed, you wouldn't suggest that that meant that the skeptic's case was fundamentlaly undermined would you? (as the climate change believers have done)
What I have found in life is that the truth is usually somewhere between the extreme views. Therefore MY position is that there is some anthropogenic climate change, perhaps not as signficiant as many of the "belivers" claim, but certainly more significant than the deniers claim.

Never seen (no due disrespect)

Never seen (no due disrespect) such a cranially-curtailed post or comments for a long time (Ghost of George Grey and Matt /Auckland excepted).

Nothing more sad than watching fleas stating categorically that the scalp is infinite and flat.

Hugh - google: Albert Bartlett / mankind's biggest failure / doubling time.

You talk of 'the fringes', (let's call it the margins - same thing) as if linear. Sorry, you are encroaching onto farmland - which makes food for the exponentially growing number of folk you are wishing to house.

Exponential doubling time is the trouble with your approach - and with the approach of all current fiscal and political regimes. In this, the Left is as bad as the Right - they're only fighting over who gets what share of the cake - if they looked up (breakfast flock vs Jonathan Livingston Seagull) they might see that the cake is finite.

When you run into a finite resource, at an exponential rate, interesting things happen. Work it backwards. From 100% used-up, the last 'doubling-time' was from 50% used up. The one before was from 25% used up. The one before from 12.5%.
So, in 3 equal time-constants, you went from having used up 1/8th of an available resource (land is one such) to having used it all up. Denial is common - it all happens faster than you can cranially adjust.

It compounds when you're using some of the resource to feed the folk wanting to live on it at the same time. Ends up very quickly as Rwanda - which had nothing to do with ethnicithy, and everything to do with overcrowding. (Hutu-only areas had nearly the same death-rates as mixed areas)

Almost all of the above commenters will be folk who think 'growth' is a good thing. Some will even think you can run it forever. To fit the reality (that you can't) with the desire (that you can) is called 'cognitive dissonance'.

The only valid yardstick is to hand on to the next generation, the place (country or planet) as we found it. No other state will do - exponential alteration beats you every time. That includes CO2.

Greenhouse science (you will note) is not in contention - just the inconvenient possibility that our activities might be forcing it. I find the distinction wryly fascinating.

What we are doing - and what must be acknowledged - is that we have been wrongly (under) valuing finite 'natural capital'. Economics only talks of 'substitution', never of ultimate scarcity. We only value it at extractive cost plus (grudgingly and lobbied against) royalties.

Which - be it carbon or productive food land - is a theft from future generations. Given that they are unwitting parties to the deal, I call that fraud.

Don't worry, there are too many selfish folk around, and too many of us anyway - we are a species grossly into overshoot. I doubt we'll set up a non-growth system.

Best estimates are that the global paddock can actually sustain about 2 billion homo sapiens at subsistence level, perhaps one billion at our level. And we've run into the cliff.

Raod-runner makes it back to the cliff- but it's onlt a cartoon :)

Beep beep

Most that regularly visit this

Most that regularly visit this blog now know that most of the worlds created credit money supply is monetised into existance by the private central banks swapping debt book entry electronic created credit for the pledges of repayment out of future taxes known as Government Bonds, or future rates in the case of local government bonds, or future profits in the case of corporate bonds, for that matter, any enterprise that the private primary bond dealers underwrite with their special debt monetising powers, thus putting aside for a minute the debate as to the human impact on the warming and cooling of the planet, lets just look at how the orthodox monetarists will have us pay for any attempt to combat climate change, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has been busy telling the world:
"At the same time, to enable mitigation at such a scale, we need considerable investment and financial flows, as well as technology development and transfer. The International Energy Agency report estimates that to cut emissions by half by 2050, we will need an additional investment of $45 trillion between 2010 and 2050."
http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocus/sgspeeches/search_full.asp?statID=278
---------------------
Given that when he says "invest $45 trillion" the financially literate among us know he means "borrow $45 trillion", and that those figures have been supplied by a think tank of corporate environmentalist investors at the core of you will find the private central bankers buying in with their created credit underwriting compacity:
"Climate change is a critical economic issue that will impact the lives of billions of people. Savvy investors already know that smart companies with a strategic vision are reducing their exposure to climate change risks and are seizing the opportunities it is creating, especially in clean energy and clean technology.
And more and more investors are jumping in on climate change every day.

In 2003, Ceres launched the Investor Network on Climate Risk here at the United Nations. The Network's membership has since grown 10-fold in four years and it now includes 65 investors with assets totaling $5 trillion. Leading pension funds from California, Connecticut, New York as well as American International Group Investments, Deutsche Asset Management, and State Street Global Advisors are just a few of the big institutional investors and asset managers that have joined the network."
http://www.ceres.org/Page.aspx?pid=913
-----------------
I would hope you will forgive me for being a little sceptical of just how creating another money changing merry go round is actually going to reduce carbon producing activity and not just become another tribute transferring commercial pyramid scam of the private primary bond dealing underwriters?

[I don't want to worry

[I don't want to worry you unduly powereddown, but the scientists who built that life raft of yours were fundamentally dishonest, and the plans were manipulated to get themselves the best fee, with no regard to your safety. Don't move about too much and rock the boat.]

And again for the choir: carbon is not a pollutant.

The author C.Northcote Parkinson is

The author C.Northcote Parkinson is indeed excellent.His work is brilliant and should be mandatory for all politics and public administration students. Never happen tho as it's too common sense.

Thanks powerdownkiwi. I read the

Thanks powerdownkiwi. I read the opinions on this blog and despair. By 2050 there will be 50 billion people on this planet. It can only end badly as every last bit of fossil fuel is burned to grow food and create the lifestyle people feel they deserve. Unfortunately people just can't grasp the science. You can't release millions of years of stored carbon into the atmosphere and expect nothing will happen but it seems most people don't get it.

In the short term, world overpopulation will favour New Zealand. We will do very well as we sell our proteins to a ever increasing consumer base. We should use the money that comes in to develop renewable energy sources and make ourselves self sufficient. Then we should arm ourselves to the teeth to fight off the countries who will want to own one of the last remaining liveable parts of the world.

My new years resolution this year is to not buy from China anymore. I don't want anymore cheap junk from a country that is building huge numbers of coal fired power stations. And to go along with that I intend to buy only locally grown food from now on. Planet earth may be doomed but I'm going to minimize my part in its destruction.

Absolutely Iain Parker - good

Absolutely Iain Parker - good post.

The problem is that we have arrived at a multi-nodal point (well predicted - see Limits to Growth).

Take it from the top. All fiscal promises - paper or otherwise - are acknowledged to represent purchasing power - of something. All go-rounds added 'profit', being a wished-for increase in the vendor's purchasing power in the next round.

In a finite system - the physical planet - that was a temporary construct - someone was, at the end of the day, going to be left holding the parcel.

That has to be separated from the ETS rort - which as you say, won't reduce carbon one jot. (for the simple reason that there isn't the global sink available - by an incontestably huge margin).

(Interesting to note that those trained fiscally but not physically, think they can address the physical by using the fiscal. Many have waved dollars at the grim reaper - Kerry Packer comes to mind) but physical realities usually triumph.

But - both are indicative of what I mentioned earlier - we failed to account properly for the cost of finite natural capital. When you think about it, as it nears ultimate depletion, the real cost approaches infinity. Hey, we had trouble when oil only approached $150.

So those of us who came at it from a physics/energy point of view, predicted 2007/8 a long ways back, while knowing little to nothing of finance.

Then we started wondering why nobody was putting the brakes on, and investigated. We found a system that needed growth to survive, and a whole generation of high priests who had forgotten to factor in the real world.

There is now not the natural capital left, to underwrite the paper 'wealth' the deluded believers believe they hold.

So when mum and dad took their new valuation to the bank, sprung a mortgage on it and 'invested it. no surprise that it vanished. It never existed. At least, it was never underwritten by purchasable quantities of commodities.

So - there is not the ability to pay for our chemical transgressions using the current fiscal system. Don't worry about the rort - it won't go the distance. Just as no cancer outsurvives the body.

Those pension funds will lose all their 'dosh', because at the end of the day, the 'dosh' no longer exists.

Dead dollars walking......

Wally has it right - invest in copper (physically) and maybe an AK47 to defend it.

Observer - thanks. Have a good Xmas. :)

The Ghost of George Grey

The Ghost of George Grey said: "AGW is really happening"

Maybe, but "Cap and trade" isn't the solution.

Carbon trading "˜the next sub-prime' "“ new research:

http://tinyurl.com/ydvf42z

The Environmental Protection Agency is being accused of trying to silence two longtime EPA enforcement attorneys:

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/11/12/defying_gag_order_epa_attorneys_s...

Chairman - Actually, Cap is

Chairman - Actually, Cap is the solution. Trade is the problem. :)

Luckily Research isn't always politically

Luckily Research isn't always politically engineered:
This will please the 24B$ (in assets) Property Council:

Research confirms immigration's contribution to New Zealand

Immigration Minister Dr Jonathan Coleman has announced findings of a research study highlighting the major contribution that immigration makes to New Zealand's economy. He was delivering the opening address at the Pathways, Circuits and Crossroads Conference, held at Te Papa in Wellington.

"What the Department of Labour's International Migration Settlement and Employment Dynamics (IMSED) research shows us is that, without immigration the outlook is bleak," says Dr Coleman.
http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/research+confirms+immigration039s+con...

Hugh needs to report his

Hugh needs to report his findings to New Scientist as he haven't seen any great cracks occurring there.

Interesting that we have so

Interesting that we have so many idealogical fundies coming out against AGW...maybe some balance is needed, such as a reply against the extreme right and left wing deniers, who it appears cant get past w=v x i at a physics level and certainly cant do risk analysis which is a BCP process (it seems).

"Mr Stephens of the Wall Street Journal states that last year Exxon Mobil provided some $US7 million (0.0027% of its net profits of $US47 billion) to climate research, sprinkled around a good number of institutions."

Indeed follow the money....

Q's to ask, what sort of "institutions" bet we find in these are denier organisations, organisations with no apparaent climate connections and not many credible climate academic institutions....and the Q to ask is, what actual peer reviewed papers has this produced....not many if any.

Then of course you miss the amounts of money spent by Exxon on lobbying or bribing Politicians with re-election money...

Exxon spent $66millionUS....

Then take this in context of it being just one energy company, many do the same thing.

Cheveron 44Million
BP 29 Million
Shell 28 Milliom
Marathon 33Million

In tems of climategate

http://mediamatters.org/research/200912030030

Mountian out of a mole hill....more like a slight depression in the ground.

"ExxonMobil (8><--------) 's contribution to global warming is estimated to be five percent of the world's total."

Funny thing but Govns dont give money to support AGW, they give money for climate research, funding is not dependent on pre-ordianed Govn position(s).

@Observer, not 50billion, its currently 6ish rising to 9~12billion, assuming a little event like peak oil does not actually happen. More realistically 7~7.5billion within 10 years then a decline msybe to as low as 2billion...too many starving to death as they cant get access to enough food which needs oil and gas.

"You can't release millions of years of stored carbon into the atmosphere and expect nothing will happen but it seems most people don't get it."

Most ppl dont want to get it because that means accepting their lifestyles are toast...we have massive debt built up by this generation for the next...if ppl are that inconsiderate on this one debt issue, what did you expect on something as vague as AGW thats 20~50 years away?

@Iain P (950am) Indeed....in fact its a double whammy...its not just borrowng 45Trillion to move to alternatives, its borrowing that while suffering high energy prices impacting on GDP. An esitmate moving forwqard is that high energy costs is not less than 4% of global GDP....probably 5%+...spend on buying oil while we spend even more jumping to alternatives.

The likes of Todd Energy and Neptune see oportunities in tidal...the Q is why are they bothering....indeed noticably despite what Brownlee wants, elec companies are not building n.gas generation plants...they are looking at renewables...hydro, wind...60% of our power is renewable...to stand a chance we need 90%+ . NIMBies are toast I expect....in a few years it will be so clear that we have serious energy issues that the RMA will be binned in total, forget 3 years for a consent, it will be 3 hours....

regards

This was never about the

This was never about the climate this is about control over every area of our lives and expanding their eugenics program and George you make about as much sense as a dead man this is not some conspiracy theory why is it that every time someone has any truth or facts to prescent its oh no the conspiracy theorist are at it again wake up man this is happening right know under your very nose
Baz

@ Mark Hubbard - maybe

@ Mark Hubbard - maybe you should go back to high school chemistry. Carbon is not a pollutant, but climate change science is not about carbon, it's about carbon dioxide. And when we emit too much of that (together with a range of other greenhouse gases such as methane) and increase its concentration in our atmosphere, the sun's radiation gets trapped rather than being reflected back into space.

Carbon dioxide is not a

Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant . All plants require it as a building block of the photosynthesis chemical reaction . Oxygen , in excessive concentrations , is toxic to plants .............Funny that , but true . Ban excessive build-ups of that pollutant , oxygen .............You go too , O 2 ! .........Increase taxes to rid us of both these nasty substances .

Good on you Roger stick

Good on you Roger stick it to them they are just climate nazis

<b>Baz</b> : One of the

Baz : One of the global warming fraternity was on the radio this morning , claiming that the fact that many heads of state are going to the Copenhagen conference , proves that global warming must be true ................. How can you argue with that . I laughed / I cried / I snorted / I pissed myself : All at once . Man , you gotta see the funny side of this , to keep yourself sane !

Judith Curry, a climatologist at

Judith Curry, a climatologist at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta who agrees with the mainstream view of global warming, wrote that the e-mails reflect a problem with scientists lacking openness about their data and attacking those they disagree with: "[I]t is difficult to understand the continued circling of the wagons by some climate researchers with guns pointed at sceptical researchers by apparently trying to withhold data and other information of relevance to published research, thwart the peer review process, and keep papers out of assessment reports. Scientists are of course human, and short-term emotional responses to attacks and adversity are to be expected, but I am particularly concerned by this apparent systematic and continuing behavior from scientists that hold editorial positions, serve on important boards and committees and participate in the major assessment reports. It is these issues revealed in the HADCRU emails that concern me the most [...]"[38]
Computerworld magazine cited the view of the RealClimate blog that what was not contained in the e-mails was the most interesting element: "There is no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to 'get rid of the MWP' [Medieval Warm Period], no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no 'marching orders' from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords."[20] The science historian Spencer R. Weart, interviewed in the Washington Post, commented that the theft of the e-mails and the reaction to them was "a symptom of something entirely new in the history of science: Aside from crackpots who complain that a conspiracy is suppressing their personal discoveries, we've never before seen a set of people accuse an entire community of scientists of deliberate deception and other professional malfeasance. Even the tobacco companies never tried to slander legitimate cancer researchers."[39]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_e-mail_hacking_incident

"Climategate" will make as much

"Climategate" will make as much of an bang as blowing up a paper bag and bursting it. Good try though.

Yeah, I know what the

Yeah, I know what the Greenhouse effect is Annabel, and 'carbon' is the acknowledged short form terminology in this debate, as in 'carbon credit' (they're not called carbon dioxide credits). But thanks for the patronising lecture anyway (you're not a school teacher by any chance?). And I don't agree there is an AGW, and neither do a lot of reputable scientists. Moreover, given how Climategate has now proven the main data provider for the IPCC - East Anglia - has been playing loose and fraudulently with raw data they have now destroyed, and NASA, the other main provider of data, is currently fighting a law suit to avoid releasing their raw data, the onus is now firmly on the Warmists to prove with science that there is an AGW, and until they do, not one government should be wasting one cent of taxpayers money on what appears to be not science, but the dishonest bullying through of an evangelical Left agenda - nothing more.

Incidentally, take away the carbon dioxide, and every plant on the Earth dies. A higher level of carbon dioxide actually promotes growth and would lead to bigger yields. Yes? I know I've read at least one scientific paper supporting something like that.

Mark H - Obvoiusly you

Mark H - Obvoiusly you see youself as above others, and have a little trouble when the obvious is pointed out to you.

Get used to it.

Water is a naturally occuring compound, and we can't do without it.

I did have a sibling who drowned in it though. So you can have too much of anything.

If you're going to mount such pathetic arguments, expect short replies.

Why does it mean so much to you anyway? Will you be a lesser person if you have to actually pay for what you do?

I couldn't imagine being that selfish.

I'm sorry about your sibling

I'm sorry about your sibling powereddown but I don't see how your post reflects my preceding post in any way?

I simply have laid out the logical premise: that is, East Anglia were the main supplier of data to the IPCC on which that organisation has formed its platform, Climategate has shown that the East Anglia scientists have deliberately corrupted the peer review process, and the dataset showing the warming itself, and have destroyed that data - why? (It's easy to draw conclusions from the email trail). The other repository of data used by the IPCC was NASA - why are NASA using taxpayer money to fight a lawsuit currently that is trying to make them release their data?

There is enough wrong here for any reasonable person to say, before we transform the entire world economy - and it is logical to assume that the forced limiting of carbon output will result in human deaths as man will be starving itself of the energy needed for food production, mechanisation, heating, etc - then the onus is now not on the 'denier', but on the warmists to retrieve the data they have previously based their pronouncements on, make it public, and from scratch, show us the science supporting an AGW.

As stated, this is a compromise, and quite reasonable position. Copenhagen should not even be going ahead until these issues are resolved. No ETS should be implemented before these issues are resolved.

(By the way, the main gist of the warmist arguments on this thread are the 'intuitive' one: there's lots of humans, they're using finite resources, this must lead to disaster. Where I disagree completely with this is that it is intuitive, it 'seems to fit', it is not science, and particularly, it ignores time frames. I know with certainty the Sun will swallow the Earth in something like 10 billion years - that is therefore an irrelevant problem in 2009. Quite possibly these other issues are also, and the best way to resolves them is to let the entrepreneurship of free markets provide the solutions as and when they are needed. Doomsaying in the meantime is irrelevant. The biggest damage done by East Anglia is to corrupt the peer review process, and thereby put science itself into disrepute, when it should be mans most powerful tool.)

MH said: "has been playing

MH said: "has been playing loose and fraudulently with raw data they have now destroyed"

No data has been destroyed. The data was provided to them by the National Meteorological Services on paper or old reel-to-reel tapes. They threw them out 20 years ago after transferring the data to computer files. No data has been destroyed. This is like the tabloids.

https://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/nov/CRUupdate

Sigh. Their emails prove they

Sigh. Their emails prove they manipulated the data to their own ends, and that data has been thrown out. On something this important, why would the data be thrown out? That's crazy. Or if you are saying the data exists, then why are they not releasing it. Climategate exists because that data cannot be re-analysed - yes? And it doesn't explain Nasa's intransigent position.

But context please. You've picked out a minor detail of what I said: it's my entire position given in my last post that is important - speak to that so we are not side-tracked to irrelevancies please.

Playing loose and fraudulently is

Playing loose and fraudulently is now a minor detail? Irrelevancies?

If you looked at their website, you would see why they are not releasing it. They don't own it. But they are attempting to get permission to do so.

DGCanuck - The revised figures

DGCanuck - The revised figures were kept, but the originals - stored on paper and magnetic tape - were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

The UEA's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece

Annabel, Powderdownkiwi, you are missing

Annabel, Powderdownkiwi, you are missing the point this has nothing to do with saving the planet have you noticed the deluge of pro global warming propaganda coming out in the NZ news papers the last week it makes me sick most kiwis are to interested in rugby the world cup house prices to even think about whats coming down the pipe this global taxation scam will have profound effects on our lives its going to destroy farming, industry you have no Idea what you are saying If you know what the word serfdom means and by the tone of your replys to Mark Hubbard you must have a higher education well I dont Im just a plumber and drainlayer but I know a liar when I listen to him and this Al Gore is one evil SOB so this climate tax you are so keen on is your personal trip to serfdom well Mark myself and many others world wide are aware of whats going on its very much like what happened in germany for ten years before the war broke out its called mass mind control.
Baz

nike air max shoes and

nike air max shoes and nike dunk shoes
www.tradertrade.com

If someone asked "what if?"

If someone asked "what if?" with regard a hypothetical future AGW, someone would have responded with: "In that case the demand for a fix will provide a monetary incentive for some smart people to come up with a solution", instead those sort of people are denying it is happening.
It looks like a limits to growth issue?

When the germans evaded Russia

When the germans evaded Russia it was called operation Barbarossa the reason they culled millions of useless eating carbon producers was they were told that there was to many of them they were subhuman and the land belonged to the elite the pure FOLK
yes history repeats itself but this time we will do it so it will look humane its called we MUST ACT NOW OR WE WILL ALL PERISH Global warming is caused by humans, even though the planet has been cooling for the last nine years.
Baz

@MarkH: 'higher level of carbon

@MarkH: 'higher level of carbon dioxide actually promotes growth and would lead to bigger yields. Yes? I know I've read at least one scientific paper supporting something like that."

Says a lot about what you read....CO2 may improve things in small amounts but in larger amounts the science says its actually worse...

try facts.

regards

"Their emails prove they manipulated

"Their emails prove they manipulated the data to their own ends, and that data has been thrown out."

Neither is true....

try facts

Baz, A short time period,

Baz,

A short time period, cherry picking data based on an unusually warm 1998 due to an el nino, which followed by an el nina period has caused a flat spot...

Nature will sort the eugenics out itself, in the next 20 maybe 50 years, lack of access to oil without a viable alternative guarantees it.

Try facts

@jh: I believe so (limits

@jh: I believe so (limits to growth). Personally I think the Govns are jumping on the AGW bandwagon because unless you are an idiot peak oil is obvious (if not just past here shortly). Such an event makes a mockery of the economic system we have had for the last 20~60 years...Pollies might promise growth but the reality is they cant deliver it without cheap energy supply growing in line with GDP....its "chicken and egg" time...and the chicken aint laying. So they either admit we cant grow from an event that has been foretold in the 1950s....and ignored...or find a convienient getout/excuse.....

regards

Steven what are the facts

Steven what are the facts pertaining the percentage of co2 that is required to maximise growth before it becomes a danger to the planet I also have read papers on co2 used to promote growth in controlled conditions. One paper I have read said that durring the highest levels of co2 durring the industial age bumper crops were recorded so plant life will absorb co2 even in high doses. I dont think the planet is in any danger of excess co2 at prescent the masses are being taken for one helva ride by a bunch of globalist and our man of the hour John Key is taking us with him .
BAZ

<b>Steven</b> said <i>Says a lot

Steven said Says a lot about what you read"¦.CO2 may improve things in small amounts but in larger amounts the science says its actually worse"¦

I said: you nit picking fool. Context. Deal with the major premise of my email. You're being asinine.

Repeat: the reasonable position to

Repeat: the reasonable position to AGW at this point - someone please tell Green Minister Smith, and Populist Key.

I simply have laid out the logical premise: that is, East Anglia were the main supplier of data to the IPCC on which that organisation has formed its platform, Climategate has shown that the East Anglia scientists have deliberately corrupted the peer review process, and the dataset showing the warming itself, and have destroyed that data "“ why? (It's easy to draw conclusions from the email trail). The other repository of data used by the IPCC was NASA "“ why are NASA using taxpayer money to fight a lawsuit currently that is trying to make them release their data?

There is enough wrong here for any reasonable person to say, before we transform the entire world economy "“ and it is logical to assume that the forced limiting of carbon output will result in human deaths as man will be starving itself of the energy needed for food production, mechanisation, heating, etc "“ then the onus is now not on the "˜denier', but on the warmists to retrieve the data they have previously based their pronouncements on, make it public, and from scratch, show us the science supporting an AGW.

As stated, this is a compromise, and quite reasonable position. Copenhagen should not even be going ahead until these issues are resolved. No ETS should be implemented before these issues are resolved.

(By the way, the main gist of the warmist arguments on this thread are the "˜intuitive' one: there's lots of humans, they're using finite resources, this must lead to disaster. Where I disagree completely with this is that it is intuitive, it 'seems to fit', it is not science, and particularly, it ignores time frames. I know with certainty the Sun will swallow the Earth in something like 10 billion years "“ that is therefore an irrelevant problem in 2009. Quite possibly these other issues are also, and the best way to resolves them is to let the entrepreneurship of free markets provide the solutions as and when they are needed. Doomsaying in the meantime is irrelevant. The biggest damage done by East Anglia is to corrupt the peer review process, and thereby put science itself into disrepute, when it should be mans most powerful tool.)

Donca' just love conspiracy theories

Donca' just love conspiracy theories that support the outcome you want?

Like I say, Mark, you are not paying your true way, and are trying to continue the process.

As for the 'world domination' nonsense - yes, there is always that pressure, but not through charging for carbon output.Most monetarists would see that as a major step backwards.

You'all just have to realise that the 'not paying for natural capital' game is up.

Get used to it.

Um, whose talking about world

Um, whose talking about world domination? And what does that have to do with anything in my post?

I'm simply saying until the fraudulent scientists at East Anglia come clean, until the Nasa data is released, and this whole science is started again from a clean slate, then any precipitous policy, such as our ETS, is reckless.

"The curse of politically engineered

"The curse of politically engineered research" Which is actually what your post is...at best...

@RT "Carbon dioxide is not

@RT "Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant" As BAZ says enough of it and it will kill you....this meets a reasonable defination of pollutant....

@MarkH: LOL...."But context please. You've picked out a minor detail of what I said: it's my entire position given in my last post that is important "“ speak to that so we are not side-tracked to irrelevancies please."

This is exactly what you and the deniers have done with these emails, taken a few statements and made pathetic cases out of context.

In terms of your posts, they are illogical, ill-founded and on occasion down right lies....you twist facts and context to suit your political agenda and refuse to accept anything that challebges your world view....this lays you out clearly as a fanatic...

Data has it seems from the recent press release not been destroyed but the original media storing the information has. This unfortunately is the price of progress, data media has a finite life....Old tape reels and punch cards even if they still existed could probably not be now read as the hardware and software no longer exists in working form. As they say 95% of the data is out there, they will release tha last few % once they have cleared this with the owners of the data.

@Baz: RE: CO2, proper studies are suggesting small increases in CO2 speed things up, but larger does are looking detrimental, ie our plants have adjusted to a certain level, going outside that may have huge negative impacts.

I give up.

I give up.

I see you must have

I see you must have been typing on edit.

Watch the below and then say my above position is unreasonable - why iimpose an ETS when the agenda written science is this shabby.

CRU's programming 'way below expected standards' . Climate science needs a reset button ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgIEQqLokL8&feature=player_embedded

Mark Hubbard, It is almost

Mark Hubbard,
It is almost impossible talking to those who have a religious conviction on this.
The science is pretty clear. CO2 is a necessary natural gas.
It is not responsible for any significant warming.

But that is very inconvenient to those who have attached themselves to AGW.
It's a shame they cannot see the truth.

quote:
Are you still bitterly clinging to your Global Warming Religion?
I'm an AGW Believer -I don't care how much CRU data was fudged or dumped, I'm still bitterly clinging to my environmental religion!
Al Gore.

LOL
http://neuralnetwriter.cylo42.com/node/2421?page=12#comment-2462

Totally agree. AGW is no

Totally agree. AGW is no longer about science, it is a belief system(like a religion). Ever tried to hold a rational discussion with a fundamentalist? The cleverest thing the carbon tax crowd did was to harness the fervor of the mostly young religion-less generation and give them something to believe in and fight for.

Agreed Steve and Properopink, but

Agreed Steve and Properopink, but one last point regarding Doomsayer Comrade Steven and CO2.

What happens if we dramatically try to reduce CO2?

Get ready to starve. Our only source of food on this planet is atmospheric carbon dioxide and water fixed by plants as carbohydrate in photosynthesis. It feeds all of the animals, including man. Trees are a good sink of carbon dioxide, but everyone has missed the largest sink of all: marine algae. And the oxygen given off during photosynthesis is our basis for life also. 75%, more or less, of this planet is covered by water, in which live plants of various sizes. On land, the primary limiting factor to photosynthesis is availability of water. In the oceans, the limiting factor is the carbon dioxide content of seawater. As the carbon dioxide concentration in the air increases, so does its partial pressure, causing more to dissolve in seawater, increasing photosynthesis by marine algae, effectively setting an upper limit to the maximum concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Another sink in the oceans is the presence of calcium ions, which precipitate excess carbon dioxide as calcium carbonate (limestone). So don't be too quick to interefere with a major natural cycle on which all our lives depend..

George F. Oerther, Jr
President and Chief Science Officer
BioFuels Energy Corporation, and now the CEO of that corporation.

Whether the extent of human

Whether the extent of human activity has accentuated the natural warming and cooling cycles of the planet or not, the private money masters would have us borrow $45 trillion of their electronically created credit over the next 40 years to combat it. With a little foresight and financial knowledge the tables could be turned upon the private money masters as the building of new sustainable energy resources is both becoming necessary and would naturally benefit the earths ecology.
The last private banking predatory lending induced depression(1930s) induced the greatest push for Public Credit as opposed to private controlled credit that history had yet seen. Many leaders meakly surrendered to the money masters threats and surrendered once again to the religion like orthodox. You can now find and produce the memiors of most of those leaders in which they state their regrets at having not implemented Public Credit.
A global push could now see the tables turned on the private money masters by governments reclaiming control of their own money supplies and spending into circulation, interest free, the public credit needed to build the sustainable energy resources that are becoming more necessary by the day and natural egological benefits that would address global warming, perceived or not.
The major concern rebuttals put foreward by the current private money masters is that public credit would be inflationary and international trade made impossible.
For the answers to rebut the monetarist rebuttal's, please have a look at these reasonably short and very straight forward slide presentations here:
http://www.reinventingmoney.com/slides.html

In regard to the international effort that would now be required to implement public credit and just how large the ground swell of support is becoming, read this great thesis:
http://www.jamesrobertson.com/book/monetaryreform.pdf

And, for the best straight forward 14 page analysis of the history of Usury(debt entrapment) that I have come across, read from page 20 down here:
http://circ2.home.mindspring.com/Money_and_Debt_Part1_lo.PDF

The monetarists have a saying of "not wasting a good crisis" as an opportunity to consolidate their position of economic dominance, the public credit advocates and weak leaders wasted the opportunities of the last great crisis, to do it again with the indepth information available that exposes this greatest commercial pyramid scam in history would surely see us rightly labelled as the dumbest species to inhabt the planet because we failed to take advantage of our supposed higher intelligence and technological advantages to have learned behaviours of common decency overcome our self destructive, selfish animal instincts.

There is a particularly well

There is a particularly well written and dispassionate (we can do with plenty of that) article thats just come up on Google Search -

"Climategate: Be Skeptical of Envirojournalism" by Bradley Fikes of the North Carolina Times.

The BBC is now starting to do its job and there is an excellent report out there of a BBC TV interview with one of the leading experts in Britain on computer programming, who is appalled with the poor standards at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia. It notes the guy is not a climate sceptic by the way.

Could someone provide links to these two articles please? Many thanks.

One would have thought that the dear old vintage media in New Zealand may have started reporting on these serious issues competently by now - particularly since the Vatican of Politically Correct Reporting - the BBC is starting to get in to it......finally.

For a bit of a laugh, the Houston Chronicle had an article by one of its journalists apologizing to readers for not reporting the University of East Anglia issue. The lame reason - environmental issues are SO difficult for journalists to understand. I suppose its much easier reporting on polar bears falling out of the sky (I kid you not). I have gone off polar bears big time - particularly since the numbers of them are growing!

I can't immediately find those

I can't immediately find those links Hugh, and I'm working today so will have to have a look tonight.

But, another interesting development as of five minutes ago, I have NASA on my Twitter, and they have just tweeted that their data (which they have been trying to keep under wraps, or at least I 'assume' this is the data that is subject of the previously mentioned lawsuit, I can't be sure because they don't mention the lawsuit, or why they are putting this up) ... [lost track of myself] Nasa have just tweeted that their data is now online, here:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

I find Nasa's actual Tweet interesting, being, quote:

Global warming? The annual figures, analyses & methods from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies are online.

The interesting thing is they have put a question mark after global warming, implying they're not actually committed to either the warmist or denier line, well, not now anyway. Of course the issue with Climategate is how this data has been possibly manipulated by East Anglia, as spoken to in the emails, but at least this information is 'out there', so it will be interesting to follow developments.

Many thanks Mark Hubbard. I

Many thanks Mark Hubbard.

I am in the main just checking Google News Search "Climategate" every so often. The reporting seems to have "exploded" over the past 24 hours.

A day or so ago as well James Delingpole? (not sure I have the surname quite right) of the UK Telegraph had a very interesting piece on how the Main Stream Media (MSM) is reporting this issue in comparison with the writing on the Internet. They call it the Tiger Woods Index (TWI). It is a fascinating read.

Steven : You say that

Steven : You say that CO2 becomes a pollutant when there is too much of it . Can you define " too much " ? By that logic , the ocean is polluted with salt , 'cos we can't drink the water as it is . Man , you're just twisting words and flapping out generalisations . Where exactly is the science , the proof , in this ? The guys are right , the Copenhagen conference is now based on discredited information , and ought to be rescheduled .

And here's the bit that really hacks me off , Steven , these bozos who re-adjust data to fit their agenda , these fecking pathetic leeches , are discrediting the whole environmental movement . And I want a clean , fresh planet to live on . Legitimate environmental issues may suffer a backlash .

and the fools march on,

and the fools march on, and on, and on................. all the while the cancerous tumor of the debt based monetary system makes ill the body of society.

Good points Mark H about

Good points Mark H about the C02 in the oceans if the sea warms slightly as it did in the ninties more Co2 is released into the atmosphere but at present the oceans are in fact cooling so its cyclical ,many scientists are saying the earth is cooling at present.
Powerdownkiwi.Steve carbon dioxide will not ever be a danger to us it carnt happen so you are miss reading what ive and others have been saying. My main point is that this is about politics and power never before in history have so many people been duped into believing a lie this big, Gobels Hitlers right hand man said at the nurenburg trials that if you tell people a lie over and over again they will in time believe it. Even at schools young kids are being taught this climate crap in NZ. Mass mind control is being used everywhere look at the media case in point watch the dumb breakfast shows in the morning here in good old kiwi land --ki ora go the All Blacks what a joke wake up
and think for yourself before that becomes illegal.

In the context of economic

In the context of economic driven political propaganda, I would highly recomend over the Xmas break that everyone have a look at the movie - Joyeux Noel -
http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/327278/Joyeux-Noel-Merry-Christmas-/over...
a true story about when the troops stopped fighting and joined each other for a couple of days during xmas, and how the hierachy had a hell of a job getting the commoners to get back at it once they had realised just how much they had in common.
It is a great example of the impact of the misleading propaganda of the elites upon the underlying civility of the basically decent majority and holds a very pertinent message surrounding the global predatory lending credit crisis that besets us today.

Thanks Iain just checked out

Thanks Iain just checked out that link looks good
Baz

Well we agree on one

Well we agree on one thing, Iain, that is a very good movie, perfect for Christmas Eve - and make sure you don't just turn off when the end credits come up, as the closing music/score is fantastic and plays for about five or six minutes.

Mind you, when I watched the movie I wasn't thinking on it as an allegory about 'global predatory lending'. I'm glad I'm not married to you Iain, the dinner time conversation would drive me to an early grave - people think I only have one track!

@MarkH: Rex, yet another right

@MarkH: Rex, yet another right wing "journalist" or what passes for them in America.

Does it not strike some

Does it not strike some of the posters on this site as a most remarkable coincidence - that just when the ruling elite's 'shell game' of unlimited 'debt money issuance' is approaching its nemesis the need for a new form of 'fiat money' - ie carbon credits - timeously appears. I'm sure the opportunity for vested financial interests to make literally billions from this is pure serendipity.

I believe Powerdownkiwi, in an admonishment to Mark, opined earlier: "As for the "˜worlddomination' nonsense "“ yes, there is always that pressure, but not through charging for carbon output.Most monetarists would see that as a major step backwards".

On the contrary Powerdownkiwi, world domination is exactly what AGW is about - for it is about the power of money and money alone. You are gravely mistaken, if you believe there is any fundamental difference between the Keynesian and the monetarist. Both are simply points along the same socialist continuum. It just that the Keynesian fleeces you blatantly, whilst the monetarist does so by stealth. The price of gold, and more particularly the gold basis, are telling us that the elite's rotten socialist debt enslavement fraud is being exposed daily for the scam that it is. Their astonishing skill has been in mobilising so many gullible people into believing that the same rogues gallery, that hitherto was telling us our sole raison d'être for existence is to consume, now want to save the planet. It is a tragedy, Of Greek proportions, that people believe them.

Of course, the celebrities and the glamorous rush to endorse this voodoo. (Reason enough to view AGW with immense skepticism!). For they do not see themselves as the same as poor 'Joe Public' - who must pay from his already plundered income. They are an elite who have been shown 'the mysteries' that the herdspersons cannot - and never will - fathom. A while back, whilst staying in a hotel, I wound up watching that great cult movie from the 1960s 'Witchfinder General'. If I recall correctly it is based on the appointment of a chap during the English Civil War - by parliament - who goes off in the pursuit and torture etc of witches and others. One's natural reaction is to sneer at the gullibility of my countrymen back then - but then a small voice enters my head saying "what about AGW'? and then I am a great deal more contrite!

He was very controversial - but never lose sight of the fact that Sir Oswald Mosely came from the elite, but chose to betray it on behalf of the ordinary man. Hence he was treated so harshly. We can debate him endlessly - but his warning of coming enslavement at the hands of the money men seems astonishingly prescient some eighty years on. Thus, I thought it might be worth offering a link, for those interested in a brief clip from his address (I think at Earls Court in 1931).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FM88BCaGius

And right wing can't be

And right wing can't be right, is that how it works Steven? Even when they're not commenting on politics?

One thing that puzzles me

One thing that puzzles me - if CO2 is the food for plants, surely more CO2 in the atmosphere is better for plant growth and thus results in more abundant food sources? I can't put my finger on the source but I recall reading somewhere that there were periods of far greater CO2 levels in earlier history and the world didnt come to an end then.

Still we will never be able to convince the Environmental Religion - they are no different than the Catholic Inquisitioners (no offence in any way intended to the Catholic faith) - extreemists everywhere seek control of the masses.

Oh hell, <b>Malcolm</b> said: <i>He

Oh hell, Malcolm said:

He was very controversial "“ but never lose sight of the fact that Sir Oswald Mosely came from the elite, but chose to betray it on behalf of the ordinary man. Hence he was treated so harshly. We can debate him endlessly ...

No! There's no debate on Mosely. He was a racist, fascist prick: the worst most evil symbol of the clobbering, ruthless State. The blind wedge of men and the brute force of the raised fist. I'd actually take my chances with the 'money men' thanks, at least I won't be dealing with them with my hands tied behind my back and a jackboot on my throat.

I can't believe you're pushing him Malcolm? And with this patronising talk of the 'common man' you're starting to sound like the true National Socialist.

Whatever has happened to that most wonderful of things: freedom. Individual freedom from tyranny. Do what you want, do what you please, so long as you initiate force of no other. Do no posters here get it? Caught in this idiot death roll between the Left and the Right, are we doomed to mince individuals into the tyranny of State every three generations because we lose our memory and are too scared to live our lives as anything other than slaves?

I was thinking of a

I was thinking of a Kundera - The Unbearable Lightness of Being - quotation when I made my above post.

Possibly nothing better sums up the current Green/AGW movement - to get this thread back on track - as well as the creeping evil of Mosely's blackshirts. In that excellent novel, Sabrina, who escaped Czechoslovakia after the Russian tanks rolled in over 1968, cannot make her émigré friends understand why she will not demonstrate against the Communists through the streets of Paris. She puts it like this:

She would have liked to tell them that behind Communism, Fascism, behind all occupations and invasions lurks a more basic, pervasive evil and that the image of that evil was a parade of people marching by with raised fists and shouting identical syllables in unison. But she knew she would never be able to make them understand.

[Not a bad movie either Iain, though the novel is superior.

Malcolm - yeah, I pondered

Malcolm - yeah, I pondered which horse will win the race too. Where we differ, is that I think the fiscal system is fundamentally broke (both meanings) now. These folk who see themselves as 'winning' in the current set-up, indeed do try and soak the wealth continually upward - Kerr and Brash being local mouthpieces for the movement.

But - I think their fiscal construct is stuffed, and I think it's already happened. There is no way back on the bandwagon, given doubling-time. So jusy how you account their 'wealth' is an interesting question. Electronic numbers? Not going to impress the hungry mob arriving at the gated community with pruning-hooks and rush-lamps.

There will be a scrap - nothing surer. 7 billion has to morph to less than 3, and that's a fair percentage of collateral damage.

It will be a physical scrap, though. And that will be along national lines - there isn't the lead-time for corporates to organise their own militaries.

Wealth trickles upward regardless of vehicle - and you have to bear in mind that you and I are relatively 'wealthy'. We do it by turning a blind eye to repressed labour, and corrupt officialdom.

There simply ain't enough to go around anymore, so what there is and what we do - will simply cost more. Very quickly, unpurchasably more.

Martin - yes, there were periods of greater CO2, but they didn't include homo sapiens. Go ahead and recreate the conditions, just don't expect to see them.....

Mark H - Actually, your

Mark H - Actually, your freedom very quiclky gets hijacked. Russia in the 'twenties being a rather noteworthy example.

Freedom also lets one breed indefinitely, and grow indefinitely - which is the flaw in the post above.

You either control that impact, or don't.

Which is where we differ.

The intelligent way is to control it.

Um, my 'type of freedom'

Um, my 'type of freedom' - libertarianism - never existed in Russia in the twenties, the very last thing from it. There was that little issue of a Bolshevik revolution in 1917?????

What are you talking about? And what on earth does your second paragraph refer to or mean?

Do you agree with Malcolm's views on Mosely too?

While CO2 is good for plant growth, I think you have a bit of a build up in your life raft.

[Did you edit your first

[Did you edit your first sentence.]

'My type of freedom' did not exist in Russia in the twenties, it was an autocracy ruled by the Czar. And anyway, the fact that 'freedom' has so many enemies, such as yourself, or the Bolsheviks, is all the more reason to strive for it, don't you think? What are you actually advocating?

There has never been a Libertarian minarchy.

Again, what are you talking about in your second paragraph? The DPB allows you to breed indefinitely, not when you have to be responsible for your actions.

Penny has just dropped. You

Penny has just dropped. You believe that unlimited freedom (actually it's bounded by the non-initiation of force) leads to unlimited breeding, thus over population, thus we're all going to run out of finite resources and die ... everything is always on a theme with you, and we always end up dead.

As I said above, a state of freedom can only exist where each individual is responsible for their actions, thus must have the resources to bring up their children. Also, a state of freedom is founded on a laissez faire economy, and the closer man has got to such an economy the higher his standard of living has always been, and the higher the standard of living then the smaller the family size, as well-off people realise there is more to life, after all, than procreation, and pursue many other goals.

For example, compare middle class family size in developed capitalist economies compared to subsistence economies, or where Catholics reign. Compare middle class family size to welfare family size in developed countries. Again, the DPB allows infinite breeding: whereas individual responsibility, freedom, puts the restraints of reason on this.

And you think my world view is simplistic. Your's is based on a bunch of bad premises.

But now we've de-railed Hugh's post, so I'm only speaking to the issues raised by him ..

Trying to pull this thread

Trying to pull this thread back.

The NASA data is interesting; if you are not sure why, the below two links cover it pretty well:

http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0811-nasa_snafu.html

climate change skeptics seized the opportunity to claim that the data is further "proof" that global warming is not occurring.

"The new numbers also show that four of the country's 10 warmest years were in the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939. Five of the hottest 10 occurred before World War II. The past 10 years are not as well represented: Only three years from the past decade are among the 10 warmest: 1998, 1999 and 2006," stated an editorial in the Investors Business Daily. "None of this is good news for the global warming faithful, who argue that the burning of fossil fuel is warming the planet because the carbon dioxide emissions are creating a greenhouse effect. Because man's CO2 emissions in the hot 1930s are nowhere as large as they have been in the past 10 years, their theory doesn't hold up well."

and

http://www.businessandmedia.org/commentary/2007/20070822130511.aspx

Much to the frustration of alarmists, however, solid scientific evidence continues to mount against the flawed notion that human CO2 emissions are a problem.

For instance, NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) just made significant changes to its temperature records, downgrading the magnitude of recent rises.

This was precipitated by discovery of errors in NASA methodologies by Canadian researcher Steve McIntyre, already well-known for his debunking of the now-infamous "hockey stick" temperature graph that was a fundamental pillar of the 2001 United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report.

Dr. James Hansen, as director of GISS, is responsible for NASA temperature records. An ardent Gore supporter, Hansen often plays conflicting roles simultaneously. Within one week of the change to the NASA record, he posted a blog diatribe "“ not officially through his employer's channels, but as a private citizen.

In his blog post, he claimed the temperature changes were insignificant (in reality, they are highly significant) and likened climate warming skeptics to "court jesters" paid by industry.

Mark, I quoted Mosely because

Mark, I quoted Mosely because he was correct in his analysis of the burgeoning power of money to ultimately overwhelm politics. Whilst his views are anathema to me this does not alter the fact that he showed prescience on an important point.

Of course, the irony is that the fascist Europe he also ultimately wished for is unfolding daily. Within this we see a Pan- European president elected by no-one (except the new 'politburo') and, if you care to do your own research on the implications of the Lisbon Treaty and the coming 'regionalization' of Europe, then I suggest you will find the ghost of Europe's past fascists written all over it.

Your offered the observation:

"I'd actually take my chances with the "˜money men' thanks, at least I won't be dealing with them with my hands tied behind my back and a jackboot on my throat".

I fear you are wrong - for it is to the destination you describe that unlimited fiat money delivers men. A careful analysis of the Weimar disaster in Germany will remind you of this. As Adolf Hitler cynically foresaw, when the great hyperinflation destroyed Germany's middle class, when people find themselves starving - with literally billions in their pockets - they are inclined to demand dictatorship. What made that hyperinflation possible - with all that followed? I think you will find it was the 'money-men'. This is the supreme irony facing my British countrymen! When fascism was offered to people via a properly constituted political party they rightly rejected it - and bankrupted the nation fighting it elsewhere. Yet, look at Britain today, and you see unfolding a fascist state that Sir Oswald could not possibly have achieved. The surveillance cameras, the monitoring of every phone call and email etc, the civil contingencies act (very similar to Adolf Hitler's 1933 'Enabling Act), the invasion of other peoples countries with scant regard for civilian casualties, recent legislation that effectively classifies Poms on the basis of race, growing restrictions on Christian (although not Islamic religious freedom) - shall I go on?

Oh and what about Diego Garcia? - I think you may find: "the blind wedge of men and the brute force of the raised fist" when you do you own due diligence at what went on there. If ever there was fascism at it worst - with consequences that spread far beyond the appalling displacement that the population suffered - is is found in Diego Garcia.

I cannot remember which French writer warned us, many years ago, that fascism in the future could well appear in forms difficult for us to readily identify. Within this it has not taken a single 'black-shirt' to rob the British people of their cherished freedoms - such dastardly acts have been the preserve of men sporting much finer cuts of designer cloth.

Incidentally, I did not refer to the 'common man'. I referred to the 'ordinary man' - and why shouldn't someone speak on someone else's behalf. This was classically done by the supposed racist Enoch Powell, when he condemned the treatment of eleven Kenyan Mau Mau during the uprising in 1959. As Powell pointed out (when others in parliament were too busy worrying about their careers to stick their necks out) there could not be one rule of law for a black man and one rule for a white man. Justice demanded that they be treated the same. Did this make him a national socialist?

If you want to avoid fascism then support sound and honest money for it is the foundation stone of a genuinely free society.

Mark - I don't think

Mark - I don't think we've derailed his post.

Urban planning, good governance and procreation freedoms would seem to have quite a lot in common.

The back seat of a Mark 11 Zephyr up at Rotary Park comes to mind......

The Story of Cap &amp;

The Story of Cap & Trade (in similar format as "Money as Debt")

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA6FSy6EKrM

Great post Chairman - watch

Great post Chairman - watch and listen people.

Excellent post Chairman - that

Excellent post Chairman - that sums it pretty well.

Agreed, great post, thanks :)

Agreed, great post, thanks :)

Iain, thanks for yours as well :)

Is there a print version

Is there a print version of that post ? My codflangered wireless broadspan internet conniption won't let me watch YouTube .

Great vid link Chairman, ties

Great vid link Chairman, ties in brilliantly with this
http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/12/04/opinion-the-cur...

Rogie, you are at least

Rogie, you are at least one Monday behind the rest of the world- Looooburn -zh- zh or is it because you spend all your money on gummy bears ?

Freeview Channel 7 and some others DW - really good programs.

Malcolm, spot on Keynesian and

Malcolm, spot on Keynesian and Monetarism, like most every ideology or religion thus far, were infiltrated and converted into two pincers of the privately owned central banker predatory lending pyramid scam.
You take Cristianity and Islam, born six hundred years apart out of conditions of economic domination of the elite few over the many, the word of God supposedly delivered to their founding prophets by the same Angel Gabriel. Their exists today 26 revisions of the Bible, approx 22,000 denominations of Cristianity and 72 sects of Islam, and when you trace the beginning of many denominations or sects they broke away from the orthodox of the time because they had been infiltrated and turned into commercial pyramid scams by slaveminded elitists and many, many times that domination consisted of monopolising the money supply and loaning it out at usurious rates of interest.
Take a look where we are today, based on the relentless blame deferring propaganda of the economic dominating banker/transnational complexity we have two huge religions, both born out of a stand against slavery and economic class systems, now coaxed into a "holy jihad" that creates a massive need for created credit and keeps many billions of people diverted away from the true cause at the heart of most every human upheaval.

Mark as for your arch enemies Lenin and Stalin, going on the information given by an eye-witness of the time in the following book link below - Pawns In The Game by William Carr 1958 -, they may well be an enemy of mine, the question being were they co-operatives of the bankers or prostrated by them?
Read chapter eleven on Stalin, most interesting, much other good info on activities of the international bankers:
http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/7897401/carr/pawns_index.html

Walter : We , the

Walter : We , the Loonies of Loburn , cannot open a packet of rubber-bands without looking for the instruction manual first . And they're always in Korean . ............. . We aspire to achieving third world status , here . ............. . Gramophone sales are bouyant this year . ............. . We've had to cease eating toast , when the old guy with the recipe died . He was 105 . His Mom & Pop are most upset ............. A tree fell down in 1921 , they still talk about it , in the village . ........... . Yeah , you could say that it's kinda slow around here , Walter .

….......same here in Kaikoura -

"¦.......same here in Kaikoura - very snailish "“ the big Hotel/ Museum development on the peninsula, the town beautification program, the new wharf development all exiting, all published in New Papers 5-10 years ago.
Result ? ZIP "“ but then we don't want to be like Queenstown - and rather talk about Ronald Jorgensen and famous Prime Ministers/ Sports Greats visiting the village - and it was a sunny, warm day today and is tomorrow in lovely Kaikoura.
On Friday I thought it is Thursday and often on Saturday it think it is Friday - and life goes on here in beautiful SI - we don't need to - we are the way we are - just great people - and modest.

I must first state that

I must first state that I am a Humanist, I believe mans problems are man-made and can be solved by man.

How low will propaganda go, read -Present Dangers - chapter written in 1958 by a politically interested eyewitness from the period of WW1&2
http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/7897401/carr/pawns_index.html

Then read this, written by a 21 year veteran of the US Treasury
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8450

Then ask yourselves, would it be beyond such people to set up a carbon trading pyramid scam that would would in no way acheive its marketed objectives?

Just released polls in both

Just released polls in both the United Kingdom (Telegraph) and the United States (neilson) show that public support globally is still falling for the theory of human impact on climate. Google News Search 'climategate" Someone may like to provide the links within this thread to the appropriate articles.

Iain - thank you for

Iain - thank you for your comment above.

As regards the Oswald Mosely issue I have now found the 'French writer' I mentioned earlier in, ironically, a biography entitled: "Black Shirt" (Sir Oswald Mosley & British Fascism) by Stephen Dorril. Mr Dorril notes: "The French specialist on the extreme Right, Pierre-Andre Taguieff, suggests that 'neither "fascism" nor "racism" will do us the favour of returning in such a way we can recognise them easily'.

In its closing pages this excellent analysis goes on to warn us "there are times when this underworld emerges from the depths and suddenly captures and dominates multitudes of usually sane and responsible people, who thereupon take leave of sanity and responsibility".

Do we not see the emergence of fascism - behind the carefully choreographed pieties over global warming? Do we not see it in sharper relief - when we consider the collective insanity gripping so many? In my view it is intellectually lazy to engage in standard 'off the peg denouncements' of people like Mosely because - in doing so - we divert our gaze from contemporary dangers. Fascism never was going to subdue Britain via arm flailing men in strange clothes sporting moustaches. Yet, as Friedrich von Hayek correctly warned in 1944, it is now an unfolding reality - essentially delivered by chopping down trees, pulping them, turning them into paper, sprinkling some ink on that paper and calling it money and then lending numerous multiples thereon as electronic 'debt' on which ever greater 'tribute' via interest must be paid to the 'bankster' elite. Now, with his 'irredeemable debt money shell game' collapsing he must find a fresh scam and carbon trading promises a new paradigm in plunder.

i suggest we,re pissing into

i suggest we,re pissing into the wind on climate change--as of the end of october china has built/sold 10 million vehicles to it,s domestic market---up 75 % from last year
if this keeps up there will be a petroliem war.----elephant in the china shop!

15 000 climate change "

15 000 climate change " experts " and 150 heads of state are heading into Copenhagen for the summit . How many 747's would it take to transport these folk . What is the " carbon footprint " of this largesse , to tell us not to create a carbon footprint . Have none of these people heard of tele-conferencing ? Bizarre , man , really bizarre . And they lecture us on waste . Amazing !

Roger, the Copenhagen two week

Roger, the Copenhagen two week conference is going to have a bigger carbon footprint than that of Morocco for the entire year of 2006.

Says everything about snouts in the trough for a nice buffet, and hypocrisy.

The ICM survey for The

The ICM survey for The Sunday Telegraph will dismay proponents of "man-made" climate change "“ including leading scientists and the majority of world governments "“ as they gather in Copenhagen for the landmark climate summit.

Asked if they backed the main conclusion of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), that humans are largely responsible for modern day rises in temperatures, 52 per cent of voters agreed.

However, 39 per cent said climate change had not yet been proven to be man made, while seven per cent simply denied the phenomenon was happening at all. Furthermore, fewer than one in four voters (23 per cent) believed that climate change was "the most serious problem faced by man" "“ a view endorsed by governments across the world.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/6737353/Only-one-in-two-vot...

Not that this affects the science.

ps The alcohol industry spends $200,000/ day on advertising, lately targeting women and teenagers.

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/calls-drink-driving-message-focus-women-...

Polls on Sept 11 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_opinion_polls

Polls on Sept 11

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_opinion_polls
Pakistan

A World Public Opinion poll conducted in February 2007 found that 2% of respondents in Pakistan believe Al Qaeda were responsible. 27% said the U.S. government were responsible, 7% said Israel and 1% named another country. 63% said they did not know

WASHINGTON, December 3, 2009 —

WASHINGTON, December 3, 2009 "” A new poll of 15 nations, most of them in the developing world, finds that majorities of the people canvassed want their governments to take steps to fight climate change, even if that entails costs. People signaled they would support public measures to limit greenhouse gas emissions and step up adaptation measures. For example, respondents would support higher fuel efficiency standards for cars, preserving or expanding forests, and extending funding to vulnerable countries so they can develop hardier crops suited to more severe climates.

"The poll's findings shed light on global attitudes at a particularly important moment: the run-up to the conference on climate change to be held December 7-18 in Copenhagen. Hearing from people in the developing world offers a new lens on this issue," says Katherine Sierra, World Bank Vice President for Sustainable Development.

Carried out by WorldPublicOpinion.org and commissioned by the World Bank, the poll questioned 13,518 respondents in 15 nations"” Bangladesh, China, Egypt, France, India, Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, Russia, Senegal, Turkey, the United States, and Vietnam.
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:22406589~pag...

Polls mean nothing, only the

Polls mean nothing, only the facts ...

The Climate-Change Travesty:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/04/AR200912...

With 20,000 delegates, advocates and journalists jetting to Copenhagen for planet Earth's last chance, the carbon footprint of the global warming summit will be the only impressive consequence of the climate-change meeting. Its organizers had hoped that it would produce binding caps on emissions, global taxation to redistribute trillions of dollars, and micromanagement of everyone's choices.

Disclosure of e-mails and documents from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) in Britain -- a collaborator with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- reveals some scientists' willingness to suppress or massage data and rig the peer-review process and the publication of scholarly work. The CRU materials also reveal paranoia on the part of scientists who believe that in trying to engineer "consensus" and alarm about warming, they are a brave and embattled minority. Actually, never in peacetime history has the government-media-academic complex been in such sustained propagandistic lockstep about any subject.

The Fiction of Climate Science:

http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/03/climate-science-gore-intelligent-techno...

Three decades ago, those climate "experts" were predicting a coming Ice Age

Oh, and Christmas trees banned for climate summit:

http://www.cphpost.dk/climate/91-climate/47679-christmas-trees-banned-fo...

I reckon better they worry about the huge airplanes flying the 20,000 delegates there.

What a farce.

Thanks folks (re-link). Sorry Roger

Thanks folks (re-link).

Sorry Roger - no transcript. However, you should find this booklet insightful:

http://www.tni.org/sites/tniclone.test.koumbit.net/files/download/carbon...

Hat tip: http://twitter.com/Peter_Cresswell http://www.notevilju

Hat tip: http://twitter.com/Peter_Cresswell

http://www.noteviljustwrong.com/blog/general/278--1200-limos-140-private...

There is an estimated 1,200 limos escorting attendees during the summit, and limos are being driven in from other countries in order to meet the demand. On top of this, there are an 140 extra private jets flying in political dignitaries and their celebrity counterparts. Not that I have anything against private jets or limos"”it's just more than ironic that upon landing they'll preach to annihilate the very comforts they so enjoy.

Between the limos, private jets, trains, commercial airfare (I doubt many are riding bicycles to the event) and activities for the twelve-day conference, it is expected that 41,000 tonnes of carbon will be emitted for the 16,500 attendees. This is the same amount of carbon that was emitted by Morocco in 2006.

Hypocrisy with a capital H. John Key should be told he is sanctioning the hypocrisy of such largesse by attending. Everything in that conference could be conducted by an email chain or online video link: no carbon footprint.

Oh, and the above article should now read 20,000 attendees.

Time for a wee rant.

Time for a wee rant.

The biggest wasters and NON-PRODUCTIVE idiots on the PLANET are going to decide how we universally, all start not WASTING and producing toxic substances.

If their MOTHERS had had an ounce of sense, we would not have to do ANYTHING, except GET ON with the obvious.

Stop all idiots like these from excessive wastage, from producing more and more obsolescent crap with energy burned to hell for the sake of a dollar and their own excessive greed and glory.

The real problems as I keep re-stating ad infinitum are those very same people we expect to fix this World's mess.

Same with the finance problems.....

Well DUH...They helped create it and perpetuate it to serve their own ends.

Technology does not need these idiots to meet...EXCEPT for the JUNKET.

As usual, all change, no change.

DUH.

@ Sore- Loser, Why not

@ Sore- Loser,
Why not make New Zealand to first "Idiot Free" country in the world ?
Not only economically that would have huge potential.

you can't put world leaders

you can't put world leaders on bikes anymore than you can give mountain bikes to the armed forces.

Hello - where are all

Hello - where are all the people - gone ?

..even the "Breakfast- Show" on TVone - gone.

Walter : Why not make

Walter : Why not make NZ to first " Idiot Free " country in the world . ..... .... ....... . That would take us back to a pre-European settlement population . ............ . Cool ! ( hang on , where do I go ? )

Rogie, the 12th of January

Rogie, the 12th of January 2012 could be our Wedding Day in Takaka. Iain Parker is our Priest, Raf the limon-cusine driver, while Mark Hubbard tells us some stories about climate- changes on the way to a wedding gift golf- lesson with Tiger donated by Paul Henry - an excellent start into a "Idiot Free NZ".

Walter

W.K. Now there is an

W.K.

Now there is an idea. Last one out...Switch the lights off. I am not sure who is the bigger idiot, me/us for putting up with NZ the way it is...or them for getting it like it.

Not that we can afford the Power Bill in future at the rate we are borrowing.

Still it would be nice not to have to out THINK the idiots in POWER.

Talking of power.....We could give Power to the people......(Ha Ha).

Nah ....on second thoughts......most cannot be bothered to get off their HARVEY NORMAN interest free couches, in front of their Interest free TV's watching REALITY pass them by as they watch their reality programs.

That is why the idiots win................pure and SIMPLE.

We need a revolution, but the people are mostly...REVOLTING.

How can we stir them up to REALITY.....

Wakey Wakey NZ.

..sorry Bernhard - have forgotten

..sorry Bernhard - have forgotten you the host - you are the important man filling up "seaweed- syrup" for the limousine to run.

Walter : Is Kaikoura getting

Walter : Is Kaikoura getting some drift from the Taihape Chemical & Fertiliser Co-op ? Sure seems to be something in the air , today .

What I cant understand is

What I cant understand is why our Government rammed through the ETS legislation while the Liberal supporters in Australia gave it to the politians in no uncertain terms - which led of course to the ouster of Turnbull with the replacement Abbott?

Were National Party supporters giving the same message to their politicians - as the Liberal supporters were in Australia? If so - did our politicians simply just ignore them?

NZ Federated Farmers was particularly hostile to it I understand.

If Key and Smith just rammed this - its very bad news.

My view is that politicians who are on the wrong side of this (which Key and Smith clearly are in rushing it) are going to look pretty stupid before too much longer.

Can someone enlighten me please on how active / passive NZ National Party supporters were, in compaerision with the Liberal supporters in Australia?

I'm sure it's not about

I'm sure it's not about political activism, Hugh, but about who you get photographed standing next to in Copenhagen.

Rogie, northerly sea- breeze in

Rogie, northerly sea- breeze in Kaikoura - so it isn't Taihape- but because we make our own bread, nevertheless you could be right.
Terrible Chemical Fertiliser are everywhere - therefore probably NZ will never be again "Idiot Free".

I'm sure our friend Harawira likes your comment 11:21am

@Sore- Loser Truck drivers eating

@Sore- Loser
Truck drivers eating Pies in front of running engines -
Bus /coach drivers talking to tourists in front of running engines -
- not for a few seconds but 5-15 minutes !!

The big boys are in Copenhagen, but we can't even tackle "small problems", which make a big impact on our environment - A NZ national campaign - like in other countries - to switch off engines-
Walter

Nicholas Arrand - yes i

Nicholas Arrand - yes i know Key likes all the pretty boy sort of politics (Im told the old ladies like him in particular) - but my question is - how much or how little heat did they get from National Party supporters regarding this ETS exercise?

Engines idling in AUCK-LAND.....every day,

Engines idling in AUCK-LAND.....every day, all day. It is called RUSH hour....HA HA.

Why did Labour , and

Why did Labour , and now National , committ us to a comprehensive ETS ? Which other country included farm animal gas in their equations . Why the fart do we have to lead the world ..............Cannons to the left , cannons to the right , into the maelstrom of stupidity marches the good folk of New Zealand . Nice gesture.........fools !

<b>Climategate reveals 'the most influential

Climategate reveals 'the most influential tree in the world'

Leaked emails from the Climatic Research Unit show how the world's weightiest climate data has been distorted, says Christopher Booker.

Coming to light in recent days has been one of the most extraordinary scientific detective stories of our time, bizarrely centred on a single tree in Siberia dubbed "the most influential tree in the world". On this astonishing tale, it is no exaggeration to say, could hang in considerable part the future shape of our civilisation. Right at the heart of the sound and fury of "Climategate" "“ the emails leaked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in East Anglia "“ is one story of scientific chicanery, overlooked by the media, whose implications dwarf all the rest. If all those thousands of emails and other documents were leaked by an angry whistle-blower, as now seems likely, it was this story more than any other that he or she wanted the world to see.

To appreciate its significance, as I observed last week, it is first necessary to understand that the people these incriminating documents relate to are not just any group of scientists. Professor Philip Jones of the CRU, his colleague Dr Keith Briffa, the US computer modeller Dr Michael Mann, of "hockey stick" fame, and several more make up a tightly-knit group who have been right at the centre of the last two reports of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). On their account, as we shall see at this week's Copenhagen conference, the world faces by far the largest bill proposed by any group of politicians in history, amounting to many trillions of dollars.

It is therefore vitally important that we should trust the methods by which these men have made their case. The supreme prize that they have been working for so long has been to establish that the world is warmer today than ever before in recorded history. To do this it has been necessary to eliminate a wealth of evidence that the world 1,000 years ago was, for entirely natural reasons, warmer than today (the so-called Medieval Warm Period).

The most celebrated attempt to demonstrate this was the "hockey stick" graph produced by Dr Mann in 1999, which instantly became the chief icon of the IPCC ...

KEY is the problem for

KEY is the problem for NZ, not the solution.

Up with OBAMA in the USELESS of A...... (I like the term Pretty Boy Politics...Hugh), no PLAN, just spin and jabber.

I was gonna say like UK too...but BRAWN is not a PRETTY boy.

To fix the worlds problems takes a lot more than these idiots will ever contemplate.

They always expect............ SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY.

I hope there are a

I hope there are a lot of trees being planted as we speak to suck up all that hot air coming out of Copenhagen, never mind all the limos!

My lovely wife says: Walter

My lovely wife says: Walter don't get angry with some bloggers/ politicians - you are burning too much energy - that's not good for our environment.

Hm, so I am a

Hm, so I am a higher educated climate nazi school teacher... Always nice to learn something new about oneself...

I am not going to opine here about whether what's happening now in Copenhagen is worth the effort or whether the NZ government should have adopted the ETS or not. Nobody knows what exactly will happen as a result of the increase in greenhouse gases: increased CO2 might indeed be beneficial for plants, land might become areable thanks to balmier temperatures, melting glaciers might affect freshwater supply, desertification might reduce areable land... Our environment is a complex and dynamic entity and it's only with the benefit of hindsight that we will know whether the models on which the current predictions are based were correct. The question is whether we want to wait until then to see whether indeed the Earth has adapted to the increase in CO2, whether its adaptation was still conducive to human life and whether humans have once again proven ingenious enough to adapt their environment. Some of us might be more risk-averse than others.

So you are a school

So you are a school teacher? ROTFL

It's not a question of risk: it's about fact, and how science and fact have been abused in a most fraudulent way at East Anglia, and how we need to start again on this issue.

Or from another angle, if you really are risk averse, then I put it to you we better get the science right before we transform the worlds entire trillions dollar economy into one that is much less productive than now, which must involve the loss of how many millions of lives? Because if you artificially turn the tap on CO2 off now, you reduce mankinds ability to:

Grow food.

Run its mechanised industries.

Even for granny to heat herself in the cold of winter because she can't afford the higher power bills.

So you tell me what the risk averse approach is from this point? Tangible fact vis a vis the disastrous economic affects and probable loss of human life, or 'we better do this precipitous thing 'just in case'.

And by the by, the head man at NASA, a Warmist, is now on record as saying the 'solutions' the politicians are looking at in Copenhagen (by inference our ETS) don't fix the problems of a supposed AGW anyway, and with Climategate, the whole IPCC approach is wrong-headed and we need to start over.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute is

The Competitive Enterprise Institute is pushing Climategate.

"CEI is a think tank funded by donations from individuals, foundations and corporations. CEI does not accept government funding. Past and present funders include the Scaife Foundations, Exxon Mobil the Ford Motor Company Fund, Pfizer, and the Earhart Foundation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_Enterprise_Institute

T - shirt for trees

T - shirt for trees : " CO2 is cool , fool ! "

Nope, not a schoolteacher, and

Nope, not a schoolteacher, and not arguing that we "artificially turn the tap on CO2 off" either. Actually, you'd be surprised to hear that I don't believe in the ETS to achieve much. I believe a lot more in improved technology and energy efficiency.

<i>I believe a lot more

I believe a lot more in improved technology and energy efficiency.

As developed in a free market: can't disagree.

DGCanuck - Ponder this: A

DGCanuck - Ponder this:

A recent analysis of the financial markets has revealed that the world's finances are in the hands of just a few mutual funds, banks, and corporations: http://tinyurl.com/kjq6pb

Taking care of business - the world's biggest corporations have hijacked the UN climate talks: http://tinyurl.com/y9uunra

haha "The American Petroleum Institute

haha

"The American Petroleum Institute spent considerable energy last summer stimulating fake "˜grassroots' opposition to ACES (American Clean Energy and Security Act)." - from link above, http://tinyurl.com/y9uunra

# Mark Hubbard Says: December

# Mark Hubbard Says:
December 7th, 2009 at 3:51 pm

I believe a lot more in improved technology and energy efficiency.

As developed in a free market: can't disagree.
....
there seems to be a significant gap between what we have now and what may be perceived as an ideal solution. The most exciting ones seem to be "x years from development". Not that that will matter if their is no problem extracting fossil fuels and (if) AGW is a hoax.
http://peswiki.com/energy/Congress:Top_100_Technologies_--_RD

PS are you familiar with the bicycle?

The lack of progress, as

The lack of progress, as you call it jh, is down to the Government side of our mixed economies, not the private sector side. Politicians and bureaucrats should just stand aside and let the entrepreneurs get on with it.

And of course, we still do have plenty of fossil fuels, and will for two or three generations more yet - actually much longer than that - so, especially given now AGW is probably debunked, plenty of time. No need to jump to the life rafts yet, and potentially kill many millions of humans with CO2 reducing taxes and legislation. (Did you realise the banning of DDT by the Green movement, to save a particular breed of vultures, arguably led to the deaths of 96 million humans from malaria? )

(Oh, to amend my above post, 1400 limos at Copenhagen, 6 only hybrid cards. Do you think the delegates actually believe in AGW?)

... that's 'hybrid cars'. 6.

... that's 'hybrid cars'.

6.

Only.

The Copenhagen Climate Challenge Conference

The Copenhagen Climate Challenge Conference Program

http://www.solopassion.com/node/7106#comment-81938

There is no consensus amongst scientists over AGW. Why have our politicians foisted on us the cost of an ETS for no 'proven' reason?

Especially competing internationally small countries

Especially competing internationally small countries can't make it in general in fields of production economics without the help/ support of government. But I agree some aren't capable to do so. Looking into the economic structure of Switzerland private sector and government work together "“ not like here in NZ against each other.

It would be very fruitful to debate why it works in some countries and not in others - go Mark !

Walter

(Did you realise the banning

(Did you realise the banning of DDT by the Green movement, to save a particular breed of vultures, arguably led to the deaths of 96 million humans from malaria? )

From memory when DDT was used indiscriminately mosquitoes were being exposed to small enough amount so that they would build up resistance and that was the reason it was stopped. I think it is still sprayed on walls in buildings.

Mmm. From memory it was

Mmm. From memory it was stopped over protests it was threatening a species of vulture.

excerpt from info pollution.com The

excerpt from info pollution.com
The DDT Ban Myth

...."One of the major problems with using pesticides is that insect populations soon develop resistance to the chemicals. Insects resistant to DDT began appearing one year after its first public health use (Garrett, page 50). As new insecticides were introduced, resistance to them also developed. Much of Silent Spring is a cataloging of reports of resistance to insecticides. With the problem of mosquito resistance to DDT in mind, a plan to eradicate malaria was developed--several years of spraying, accompanied by treating patients with anti-malaria drugs, would be followed by several years of monitoring. Here is how Paul Russell, who would head the eradication effort, explained it in 1956 (Quoted in Garrett, page 48):

Generally, it takes four years of spraying and four years of surveillance to make sure of three consecutive years of no mosquito transmission in an area. After that, normal health department activities can be depended upon to deal with occasional introduced cases. . . . Eradication can be pushed through in a community in a period of eight to ten years, with not more than four to six years of actual spraying, without much danger of resistance. But if countries, due to lack of funds, have to proceed slowly, resistance is almost certain to appear and eradication will become economically impossible. Time is of the essence [his emphasis] because DDT resistance has appeared in six or seven years.

Incredible as it might seem, while public health officials were cautiously limiting the usage of DDT, it was being used in increasing amounts in agriculture, especially on cotton, a cash crop (Chapin & Wasserstrom). This heavy use led to resistance among malaria carrying mosquitoes throughout the tropics. In this instance, the unwise use of DDT, rather than improving life, actually resulted in a resurgence of malaria. According to Chapin & Wasserstrom (page 183) "Correlating the use of DDT in El Salvador with renewed malaria transmission, it can be estimated that at current rates each kilo of insecticide added to the environment will generate 105 new cases of malaria." "

http://info-pollution.com/ddtban.htm

Keep reading, DGCanuck. The financial

Keep reading, DGCanuck.

The financial sector's main interest in the new climate deal is that it will deliver bigger and more lucrative carbon markets.

This rapid growth has already spawned more complex markets where carbon credits are bundled together, then sliced up and resold "“ similar to the structures that brought the derivatives market to its knees during the recent financial crisis.

It is dangerous for the same reason: carbon markets sell a product that has no tangible underlying asset "“ fertile conditions for the creation of a new "˜bubble'.

Traders don't know exactly what they are selling. And it becomes increasingly meaningless to talk about emissions reductions since what is "˜reduced' on paper is so far removed from any measurable change in industrial practice or energy production. Speculation has become an end in itself. Meanwhile, emissions continue to rise.

Head of the US delegation at recent UN climate talks in Bonn argued public money should be a "˜catalyst' for private gain.

Chief climate negotiator for Sweden and chair of the EU Group, echoed this message, suggesting that public funds should be a "˜lubricant' for private sector investments.

http://tinyurl.com/y9uunra

Even the Rothschild's advocate Cap and Trade:

Simon Linnett, Executive Vice-Chairman of Rothschild, has called for a new international body, the World Environment Agency, to regulate carbon trading.

"As a banker, I also welcome the fact that the 'cap-and-trade' system is becoming the dominant methodology for CO2 control"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/3323732/Carbon-trading-mus...

Billed as the first of its kind in the Asia-Pacific region, Rothschild, E3 carbon credit investment fund.

"With recent developments in international climate change policy, the question is no longer if, but when the global carbon trading market will emerge," said Richard Martin, chief executive officer of Rothschild Australia.
Date: 03-Sep-02

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/17562/story.htm

A global carbon market will

A global carbon market will potentially go the same way as fiat currency.......little control of the underlying commodity but phenomenal leverage and securitisation of future flows...carbon derivatives will be very dangerous.

I still believe the only approach to take is to simply limit global fossil fuel extraction and see the global price adjust accordingly. Then that annual budget can be managed and reviewed as new information comes to hand. New information will dictate whether the annual budget increases or decreases. It's quick and will work immediately. Many of the global market structure are in place already.

http://sustento.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/climate-control.pdf

ETS schemes are putting the cart way before the horse and the thought of all those bureaucrats and bankers wasting more resources makes my eyes water.

The focus is very much

The focus is very much on the issue if how the climate reseach underpinning all this, has been conducted -

I would urge people to read an extremely thoughtful and rather lengthy article by Steven F Hayward of the Weekly Standard "Scientists behaving badly".

Coming from the Weekly Standard, towards the end, the ideologically driven leftie scientists cop a certain amount of the blame.

i would disagree somewhat with Hayward on this point - because these guys would not have got out of the starting blocks, if the ill disciplined and out of control public bureacracies didnt seek them out and finance them. And of course ignore and attack those they saw as their enemies in their persistant quest for greater control. There would be good numbers on the protectionist right only too willing to support the bureacracies as well.

Hugh - "leftie scientists" -

Hugh - "leftie scientists" - ironic when you think that Maggie T gave a major impetus to the GW research to help justify shutting UK's mines and therefore break the power of the NUM, so it's alledged.

Watching the opening of Copenhagen

Watching the opening of Copenhagen on New Zealand's TV 1 news tonight was vomit inducing.

The Scam started with a video of a terrified young girl screaming her head off while clutching to a palm tree, the sea roaring up to get her. ... Yeah right, so Hollywood, rather than science, will rule the next two weeks - I guess nothing we didn't know there.

And if anything could actually be called child abuse, then it was the young Fijian girl breaking down on the stage, crying, desperate for the world leaders to save her from climate change.

How sick is that. For every Madoff I'll show you someone worse, namely Al Gore, Phil Jones ...

By the way, a wealth of information on the con that is climate change on this thread on Lindsay Perigo's excellent SOLO site:

http://www.solopassion.com/node/2291

New Zealand Television One Close

New Zealand Television One Close Up Debate on Climate Change - with Ian Wishart (Skeptic) and Gareth Morgan (Alarmist) - Text Poll 77% support Wishart - 23% Morgan.

Why arent we seeing the Main Stream Media fulfilling its public responsibility in encouraging constructive discussion of these issues?

@Hugh Pavlevitch - mainstream media

@Hugh Pavlevitch - mainstream media and public responsibility.... is an oxymoron... (with the execption on RNZ National maybe).

Hugh - sometimes I think

Hugh - sometimes I think you start to make sense then you revert to type - ideologically-driven drivel. Your ideologically based dismissal of climate change mirrors the intense extremism of the greenie doomsdayers on the other side of the fence.

It reminds me of some of the rubbish your mate Wendell Cox has published. Like his study out of Australia that latched on to a report that correlated people living in inner Sydney suburbs with carbon emissions. Cox then very simplistically and moronically extrapolated that this debunked the notion that urban sprawl leads to higher carbon emissions by virtue of the fact that people living in inner Sydney suburbs generated greater per capita emissions. Of course, the per capita emissions of such households had nothing to do with urban form but everything to do with their wealth and associated consumption habits.

Reverting to ideological type will do nothing for your cause. Better to keep things grounded in practicality and reasonableness. Because you do have some good things to offer.

meant urban form hat the fact that people in the inner suburbs

So you scoff all sides

So you scoff all sides of the argument Matt: what do you actually believe in the climate debate?

Do you believe the manipulated science for AGW, despite Climategate?

Do you think the current state of evidence justifies transforming the entire world economy to a less productive one, that will kill millions of human beings?

Again, read through this thread:

http://www.solopassion.com/node/2291

or this:

http://www.solopassion.com/node/7139

There is no consensus amongst the scientists on this. The opening of Copenhagen was reckless and pathetic extremism.

Put your colours to the mast Matt: cheap potshots, or do you have an opinion one way or the other?

Matt in Auck - (a)

Matt in Auck - (a) I could not be clearer in stating that it is the quality of the research that is my concern - and (b) I most certainly do not take an ideological approach to these issues. In fact I have been much harder on the "right" really - protectionists, economists, industry groups etc.

Mark - unlike libertarians like

Mark - unlike libertarians like yourself I do not believe the world can be explained in one-sided and simplistic black and white arguments.
Although libertarianism has interestign things to offer, it is a fatally flawed extreme philosophy which if implemented in reality would be just as disastrous as other extreme viewpoints like fascism ,socialism etc.
Most things in life aren't black and white and neatly compartmentalised as extemists usually simplistically portray. My view is that climate change is no different. I believe, like former skeptic Gareth Morgan in his recent book, that human activity has contributed significantly to climate change. I do not take the extreme view, I attribute some climate change to man-made causes and some to natural causes.

Is this not a reasonable view?If not why?

Hugh - That's just a

Hugh - That's just a bit cute. You've critiqued the National Party who are not the right, they are centrists

Well, Gareth Morgan does not

Well, Gareth Morgan does not explain why the Earth was warmer even 1000 years ago, when man wasn't even industrialised. He should have stuck to his specialty.

But, in this argument, AGW, the onus is not on me for I feel man need do nothing. What do you think man should do: nothing, or, without scientific consensus (my posts have proven than), limit CO2 emissions thereby transform the world economy to one that is a less productive one, indeed, much less so (which, because we are talking about reducing the energy man has available to feed and shelter himself, inevitably means killing people - as black and white as that - quite outside the issue that a successful Copenhagen means a group of unelected bureaucrats in Europe will have a fundamental say in how much, for example, we pay for renewable hyro power in New Zealand? Every bill, every month.)

I don't want to be enslaved to a bureaucrat I shall never see, and cannot vote out, on the back of a fraudulent science borne by an agenda.

By the way Matt, the

By the way Matt, the ancillary to my above post is that Libertarianism has nothing to do with an AGW or not. A man-made global warming, or not, is not down to politics, although Phil Jones has proven that to the environmental movement, it is indeed so, and has little to do with the facts of reality on which science should be concerning itself. Libertarianism is founded in mans reason, and on the facts of reality.

You guys still blowing hot

You guys still blowing hot air on this subject ? If 10's of thousands of environmentalists and climate-change scientists , and 110 heads of state , can create the mother of all " carbon footprints " by lobbing into Denmark , from all corners of the globe , then you know something is wildly shonky about the " Global Warming " agenda . Whatever happened to using the " clean & green " internet for conferencing . No CO2 produced , no fossil fuels wasted , instant communications . Copenhagen is the " junket " of all junkets for the parasites who feed off the taxpayers . And to replace the Kyoto protocol , they'll produce a Copenhagen one , to enshrine their greed and thievery .

Cracking article in The Press

Cracking article in The Press today, page A19, unfortunately not online yet:

'Proof Needed Not Hype'

by Dr Roddy Campbell, an outspoken A&E doc at ChCh hospital.

Can anyone find the link?

Roddy, the force is strong with you.

Good man, not idle at all.

Cheers, Les.

Who is Blythe Masters? http://tinyurl.com/yfyjgth

Who is Blythe Masters?

http://tinyurl.com/yfyjgth

Looks like she oversees some

Looks like she oversees some top talent!

SIFMA's Chairman of the Board is Blythe Masters; SIFMA's senior management includes T. Timothy Ryan, Jr. CEO & President; who took the position after pulling his name from consideration for the Treasury Department's top international policy advisor position in April 2007 after problems were raised concerning his financial portfolio, and he refused to take certain steps demanded by the Treasury Department's ethic lawyers...

Carbon Derivatives, anyone...

This award-winning cartoon depicts humans

This award-winning cartoon depicts humans as a virus upon the earth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKEAXOnogZU

It's good to see someone

It's good to see someone with similar values to me.

'NZ hopes to make splash

'NZ hopes to make splash with global plan.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10615784

"The Government has plans to lead a fund to research how to cut greenhouse gases from agriculture and is working on getting other countries signed up."

But wait for it.....

"Lord Stern, the author of an influential report on the cost of global warming, caused a stir in England this year when he said a vegetarian diet was better for the planet because it used fewer resources."

Yeah, can just see Tim chowing down with Stern on some broccoli soup and a pint of soy milk. You never know, anyway recipe here somewhere:

http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/04/24/6-recession-tip...

"4. Love broccoli and use the florets and stems for 2 separate meals. Thanks to Les Rudd for that."

It's funny old world, and I reckon it's only gonna get funnier.

Stern, dream on.

There will be a follow

There will be a follow up article of mine "Housing Bubbles & Parkinsons Law" posted tomorrow, when the busy team at interest co clear the decks today with Hanover and other matters.

The same theme of course runs through land use and climate issues. All this needs to be better understood - so that hopefully we eventually see the appropriate public policies put in place to deal with the serious issue of out of control public bureaucracies.

Hugh Pavletich

Thorough and to the point,

Thorough and to the point, thanks.

Greate post! thanks for sharing.

Greate post! thanks for sharing. my idea when there is hard times you have to get some extra cash i find out how you can make money taking surveys, this way i have earned to get me a new computer. especially through paid surveys etc,

Greate post! thanks for sharing.

Greate post! thanks for sharing. my idea when there is hard times you have to get some extra cash i find out how you can make money taking surveys, this way i have earned to get me a new computer. especially through paid surveys etc,

Affiliate Marketing is a performance

Affiliate Marketing is a performance based sales technique used by companies to expand their reach into the internet at low costs. This commission based program allows affiliate marketers to place ads on their websites or other advertising efforts such as email distribution in exchange for payment of a small commission when a sale results.
www.onlineuniversalwork.com