|Home||blog.alor.org||Newtimes Survey||The Cross-Roads||Library|
|OnTarget Archives||The Social Crediter Archives||NewTimes Survey Archives||Brighteon Video Channel||Veritas Books|
11 December 2009 Thought for the Week:
“The mainstream media - with a handful of (conservative) exceptions - do not know what terrible damage they are doing to their credibility by ignoring or drastically downplaying the Climategate scandal. The story is out, a couple of million times over, on the Internet.
- - Source: Andrew Bolt Blog, Saturday 28 November 2009
A RECALL TO ARMS AGAINST THE TAX
Finally, the CPRS bill has been defeated in the Senate, with the Coalition voting against the introduction of a massive new tax on the Australian people.
What complete insanity the Labor Government was proposing for us.
Now we already have Dr James Hansen, the grandfather of global warming, saying an ETS is a failure and we have to look for other alternatives.
- - Senator Barnaby Joyce, The Nationals Senator for Queensland 3rd December 2009
DEATH BLOW TO 'CLIMATE SCIENCE '- DELIBERATE FRAUD
by Dr. Tim Ball
Someone hacked in to the files of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) based at the University of East Anglia. A very large file (61 mb) was downloaded and posted to the web. Phil Jones Director of the CRU has acknowledged the files are theirs. They contain papers, documents letters and emails. The latter are the most damaging and contain blunt information about the degree of manipulation of climate science in general and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in particular.
Climate science hijacked and corrupted by this small group of scientists:
I had the pleasure of meeting the founder of CRU Professor Hubert Lamb, considered the Father of Modern Climatology, on a couple of occasions. He also peer reviewed one of my early publications. I know he would be mortified with what was disclosed in the last couple of days.
Jones claims the files were obtained illegally as if that absolves the content. It doesn’t and it is enough to destroy all their careers. Jones gave a foretaste of his behaviour in 2005. Warwick Hughes asked for the data and method he used for his claim of a 0.6°C temperature rise since the end of the nineteenth century. Jones responded, “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?” He has stonewalled ever since.
The main reason was because it was used as a key argument in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Reports to convince the world humans caused rapid warming in the 20th century. The emails obtained are a frightening record of arrogance, and deception far beyond his 2005 effort.
Pervert science in service of social and political causes
The person in question was Jonathan Overpeck and his even more revealing emails are part of those exposed by the hacker. It is now very clear that Deming’s charge was precise. They have perverted science in the service of social and political causes. Professor Wegman showed how this “community of scientists” published together and peer reviewed each other’s work. I was always suspicious about why peer review was such a big deal. Now all my suspicions are confirmed.
Emails reveal how process was controlled
Total Control… left wing conduit to… New York Times
Carbon Credits shell game
You can download the climate change fraud documents from the link below: https://www.filedropper.com/foi2009 or https://www.megaupload.com/?d=003LKN94
"The Fall of the Republic" DVD from Heritage Books, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley S.A. 5159 $12.00 posted.
SENATE REJECTS EMISSIONS TRADE LAWS
CLIMATEGATE NOW FOLLOW THE MONEY
“Wall Street Journal 30th November 2009:
To read some of the press accounts of these gifts—amounting to about 0.0027% of Exxon's 2008 profits of $45 billion—you might think you'd hit upon the scandal of the age. But thanks to what now goes by the name of climategate, it turns out the real scandal lies elsewhere. Climategate, as readers of these pages know, concerns some of the world's leading climate scientists working in tandem to block freedom of information requests, blackball dissenting scientists, manipulate the peer-review process, and obscure, destroy or massage inconvenient temperature data—facts that were laid bare by last week's disclosure of thousands of emails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, or CRU.
But the deeper question is why the scientists behaved this way to begin with, especially since the science behind man-made global warming is said to be firmly settled. To answer the question, it helps to turn the alarmists' follow-the-money methods right back at them.
Recipient of $19 million in research grants
Why did the money pour in so quickly? Because the climate alarm kept ringing so loudly:
And all this is only a fraction of the $94 billion that HSBC Bank estimates has been spent globally this year on what it calls "green stimulus"—largely ethanol and other alternative energy schemes—of the kind from which Al Gore and his partners at Kleiner Perkins hope to profit handsomely.
Supply, as we know, creates its own demand. So for every additional billion in government-funded grants (or the tens of millions supplied by foundations like the Pew Charitable Trusts), universities, research institutes, advocacy groups and their various spin-offs and dependents have emerged from the woodwork to receive them.
Today these groups form a kind of ecosystem of their own. They include not just old standbys like the Sierra Club or Greenpeace, but also Ozone Action, Clean Air Cool Planet, Americans for Equitable Climate Change Solutions, the Alternative Energy Resources Association, the California Climate Action Registry and so on and on. All of them have been on the receiving end of climate change-related funding, so all of them must believe in the reality (and catastrophic imminence) of global warming just as a priest must believe in the existence of God…
Australia’s poor databases
This is not the sound of settled science, but of a cracking empirical foundation. And however many billion-dollar edifices may be built on it, sooner or later it is bound to crumble.”
CROSS-EXAMINING THE CLIMATE CHANGE SCAMMERS
by Kurt Schlichter
A trial lawyer reading through the hacked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) will immediately, almost unconsciously, begin generating a list of questions he would love to ask the authors if he were able to face them on the witness stand and under oath. The beauty of the adversarial process is how cross-examination tests and challenges the other side’s position – precisely what the emails indisputably show the CRU and its allies in the climate change scam have gone to shocking lengths to avoid.
There are several lines of examination that come immediately to mind. We can rest assured that it will never happen – as the emails show, the last thing they want to do is be in a position where they have to explain themselves.
So, Dr. Jones, when you used the word “trick,” you really meant that it was not a “trick” at all but a valid, scientifically recognized process of data interpretation?
So, is it only proponents of man-made global warming that habitually use words and phrases that mean precisely the opposite of their common usage to describe their work?
But, as delightful as it would be to pick at particular instances of the activists’ admissions of fraud and their lame attempts to explain them away, there’s really one question that needs to be asked. In fact, if Al Gore would ever expose himself to the questions of anyone beyond the most credulous climate change sycophants, someone ought to ask it of him:
A normal person would answer with a resounding, “Yes!” A normal person would be relieved that not only is our planet safe, but that we need not spend trillions of dollars and forfeit our most basic freedoms in pursuit of remedies for the bugbear of climate change.
But do you think for a second Al Gore would say, “Yes”? Do you think any of the global warming suckers would? Get real.
Understand you would not get an express, “No.”
But after 15 years of examining witnesses, I have a rule of thumb. Any answer to a question that is not an unambiguous “Yes” is really a “No.”
Investors in ideology - professionally and financially
Belief requires an act of faith
And this leads to one final question for the climate change believers
TONY ABBOTT GAINS THE NUMBERS
by Betty Luks
Change of personalities not enough – change of policies more to the point
Well yes, as we now know Lord Christopher Monckton read it and set out to warn his fellow men just what it all meant. His Youtube address had received a million hits up to the time that Albrechtsen wrote her piece for the WSJ.
Lord Monkton warned the "scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention" that starts on page 18 contains the provision for a "government." The aim is to give a new as yet unnamed U.N. body the power to directly intervene in the financial, economic, tax and environmental affairs of all the nations that sign the Copenhagen treaty.
Mrs Albrechtsen continues
SOME OTHER BASIC QUESTIONS
Have you watched the DVD “The Fall of the Republic” yet? You need to - then you will realise how we were all ‘conned’ by these world-government-bankster fraudsters.
Did Governments quietly change the laws so that the gangster bankers could set up the scams without ever being held legally accountable?
What did/does Malcolm Turnbull have to say on the matter? After all, a former merchant banker wouldn’t be totally ignorant of what it was all about.
When are the politicians going to apologise to the Australian people?
And when are the politicians who were pushing so hard for the Climate Change Treaty, thereby signing our national and personal sovereignty away, going to resign their positions in Parliament ? There was a time they would have lost their heads !
UNITED NATIONS: FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Don’t take our word for it. Read the following portions of the draft paper Lord Monkton referred to in his DVD:
Now is the time to ACT!
|© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159|