Terror Alerts - Keys is the Key

Yester-Eve John Keys was fighting for his reputation. Having told protesting New Zealanders in 2012 and 2013 that mass surveillance was not and would not happen, five-eyes, the NSA term for mass surveillance in Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand, Canada and the USA was in full swing. So says Snowden, https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/15/new-zealand-gcsb-speargun-mass-surveillance/ and now lots of people know, albeit covered up and silent today amongst Australian media.
So, what might be the payoff for mass surveillance on your own nation's citizens?
Look at our Tony and you can fill in the picture.
By implication, we are part of five-eyes, the relentless feed of all Australians data also, to the NSA. Yes its been for years. The reward for Tony? Juicy bits! Secret info! Schoolgirl bitchy gossip! Dirt!
Where does Tony most need dirt? In another country - to inflame outrage, and  in our own country to incite fear,.. a distraction from political and budgetary disasters.
But how does a supposedly Christian PM, talk God in one sentence and talk war escalation - supplying planes and troops -in the next sentence? Wasn't there something about turning the other cheek in the teachings of JC? "Live by the sword, die by the sword!"?,.... no answer..?
It is however totally imaginable that Binney and the NSA have gathered selected phone conversations and emails from AustralianMuslim hotheads -"Fuck this gov, the only thing to save them is a b0mb and Shariah's Laws"
Just think, 20 million people, fifty conversations a day, out of a billion conversations the NSA has to get a scoop of pissed off outspoken "hits". They then feed them to Tony and Bill (in Security Briefings) who immediately agree, TERROR ALERT!
So, the NSA is the giant spider presiding over treasure map see https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/14/nsa-stellar/, the wwweb itself. From its treasure haul - dirt and secrets - it can either push the right buttons, for public and for figurehead, or pull the right strings. Bacon nailed it - Information is Power!
Tony should reconsider Christian Virtues - kindness, charity, shared suffering if he wants to leave a legacy other than the escalatory devastation of Herod the King.
For God's sake Tony, think it through! Damn yourself if you will, but why pull Australia into it?

Headless Journalists

With no alignments nor justifications intimated, problems and misunderstandings continue.
To think one can commit unkindnesses and not arouse antipathy, antipathy to the point of malevolence, is  comfortable MSM conceit. Sow destruction - reap peace? After how many wars, lives and generations might we come to terms with the failings of such an argument?

Eddie's Revenge

Ever wondered how such clean shaven high principled political high rollers got caught up in this ICAC debacle? Well if you understand how Eddie has worked up to now you might come to the same suspicion that I have come to. No, its not the NSA, its good old fashioned dirt and human connections, people willing to dump. Score settled and favours repayed!

One yellow bottle bobbing round Long Bay,
Swore 'f he should fall, there'ld be more coming his way,
He hadn't climbed so high in his life of power nor crime,
Without preparing fully to revenge himself each time.

The Israel Question

The Israel Question; how much has the US (of puppetmasters) said ,"Crank it up Israel!" to divert the media public interest away from the MH17 downing, Ukraine's part in it and the likelihood of untold political damage should the world realise a reckless belligerent Ukraine has acted dumbly enough to expose and ruin their US backers?

Recycling - greens and profiteers

Where does the money recycle to?
Businesses make political donations - libs and labor - get legislative favours.
Libs and labor - buy advertising - securing continuing favourable comment.
People pay not only taxes but a little more to all the businesses (to cover political donations).
This isnt the recycling the greens believe in,they dont even get a handle on it. Its little wonder we are stuck in a two party system. The greens aren't buyable nor profitable for corporate lobbyists. They've no cash to splash and cant buy public opinion. Thats where "Democracy" fails, when profit and money buys opinion from those who prefer not to penetrate the powergame.

MSM, Eurasia and 1984

All America's accusations against Russia,.. who might show us that America has not backed nor instigated the Western side of this War? Here is more comprehensive information. google Eric Zeusse.

"Ukrainian government" MSM says,...who elected such government?
"Rebel held territory" MSM says,..do they mean ukrainians defending their own countryside? People who do not wish to have their public assets sold off though US and western investment banks to global investors? People averse to a 17BillionUS$ noose being tightened about their necks?
Kiev sent the plane off course. US wont release satellite photos. BBC pulled their own news reports. Twitter removed the Kiev air control tower employees tweets following the crash.
Why would a Ukrainian government escalate fighting over a crash site when the so called "rebels" have up to now obliged with regard to site access and black boxes?
1984? we've slept through it.

Floating away and Bubbles

Abbott's youthful ( conservative ) paper upon the errors of floating the dollar in hindsight is notable. Our dollar has traded from 56c to 1.13 since, devastating many an industry amidst such instability. The floating dollar does raise serious issues.

The biggest of which is that every player is in it for themselves. And big financiers do mighty well out of such variable floating currencies, pushing one way then the other, making waves then plundering the instabilities.

Our high dollar has now wiped out much of our agriculture and agricultural processing, our manufacturing, ford holden .

It has risen from excess capital in US markets via low interest rates, pushing commodity prices into bubble zones. Profits for wallstreet bankers, disasters for the farmers and industrialists on the other side of the deals.

Then our dollar follows - bubble zones, till many industries are unsustainable.

We could have kept our dollar down with the right intentions and practises.

Right intentions? Selfish accumulation or seeking balance and common good?

Printing of money weakens currencies and incites inflation. For the latter reason it has largely been tabooed.

But where one considers and works with Steiner's solution - gift money - inflation need not take hold. Concievably printing money could have moderated our overblown currency, saving many of the industries lost over the last 5 to 7 years. Inflation would have gone through the roof is the argument against but had we significantly gifted support to needful countries, making lifelong friends, building global stability,mutual interest and respect, inflation imaginably needn't have emerged, let alone devastated.

Even now, were the government to use such gift impulses, in the form of vehicles, cars and parts for East Timor (bug free), New Guinea, Malaysia, India,Vietnam, Maldives, Africa......contracted into the future we could stabilise our industries. Similarly for bottled fruit, or for canned vegetables, for milk or for cheeses.

We have vast Intellectual advances and could also offer much as aid to Afghanistan or Iraq, medicine, agriculture, infrastructure.

The quest for sound government, for harmonious relations, is to look beyond the three year electoral cycle to the five, ten, fifteen and thirty year cycles, aiming not for corporate profits, but for commonwealth, for balancing, for global stability.

We need citizens with similar understanding if we want democracy to realise such developments.

Abbott has inherited an economy that is rurally struggling. Agricultural businesses, farmers too are failing to survive the post GFC currency disturbances. America and Europe QE's have kept their economies from shock/shutdown, but shot our dollar so high no-one wants to buy Australian farm produce.
To deflate the dollar might help. Were we to fund humanitarian educative measures where needed, globally, from "created currency" we might save our farmers (by deflating our dollar), and our neighbours by spending dollars on helping them.

Congestion

So we've now got the small business lobby noticing the constriction on the roads, see the smh
....but government has been so busy accommodating the kindness brigade with 40km/h school zones, the traffic lights manufacturers with new sets of traffic lights, the locals with restricted side streets twisted, speed-bumped and stopsigned, the taxi lobby by opposing rideshares and the tollroads with funneling strategies they haven't noticed.
Seeing its an economic argument the government will likely want to jump,... but even they are constricted by their own policies, bureaucracies, ...

Inflating the Dollar (and Destroying the Local Economy)

In the grand tradition of "The Sorceror's Apprentice", Julia & Co have inflated the Australian dollar to the point where our farmers are selling up, our food processors are being liquidated and our new industrial and mining ventures are being shelved, priced out of global markets.
When we 99% are covering the bank's deposit holders from any loss for the next five years its little wonder shifting global funds are pricing up our AUD currency. Our depositors interest rate is already significantly better than America's.
All Swannie needs to do now is grab at super funds or swipe at negative gearing and J&Co will tip all the pricing models on their heads,...utter mayhem,... and we, the 99% will be wearing massive losses courtesy of Canberra guaranteeing these banks.

Default and Dominoes - Cypress

So Cypress has taken the less damaging option, given in to the realisation that they cant fund their own deposit insurance scheme if their banks go down.
But which other PIIGS country can? America could, they could print more money, so too the Brits but the countries bound by EU legislation cant source the QE to comprehensively guarantee their deposit insurance schemes. We dont even know if America would want to protect and cover deposit holders.
Have the EU financiers understood this? Cypriot haircuts are likely to prove highly contagious. Were it October and impending Winter in the PIIGS countries there would be certain economic terror and mayhem. Maybe the hopefulness of Spring will engender acceptance and thwart any impending run on the banks.
Otherwise the only solution is to have the ultimate guarantor of each countries deposit insurance schemes the EU itself, lest it hold any out of favour country to ransom.
This haircut to save the big financiers could easily be at the expense of the whole global economy.
As the economic policy is run by bankers, it will likely take a Grillo, to roll the austerity Monti's of the EU before any people powered economy can establish a sound and sustainable economy into the future.

Genious

You've got to hand it to our PM,
Just when Obeid was ready to steal all the top positions, media headlines Australia wide, Julia takes the day, (no mention of Orkopoulis) and puts o'Farrell in a bad light,.. for "as long as it takes".

muck, murk and media management

Yesterday one would've sworn Obeid would headline, but, our political genii Julia,

extraordinary timing,.... 
barry the "not perfect Catholic" deservedly upstaged.

Losers

To exacurbate the extremes of economic cycles is the way to loose funds for investors (buying high selling low). Our financially literate liberal party members and leaders most certainly understand this. To exacurbate the extremes of wider economic cycles is also the way to stress societies (expanding in the boom, contracting in the doom).

Inadvertently, the hard line ideals of our conservative government states is on the verge of committing all these ill conceived ideologies of policy into practise, personal investment knowledge and state policy totally schizophrenic--not aware they are side by side in mutual opposition - right hand not knowing what the left is doing. Emerging from party policy, in the blindness of politspeak, nothing learned from october 1929 and the many years of contraction that followed they are carreering into further contractive policies blighting our emerging future (generation).

Warren Buffet has prospered from counter-cyclical investment, government leaders should also be countercyclic, be trying to bring balance, to stabilise, save in the boom, support amidst doom.---or we will be the losers.

Budgets or Balance

Sure they want to balance the budget, but why be myopic and rigid. The real
job is to oversee a balanced state and a balanced state economy. That
intrinsicly means moderation. Thoughtful, well conceived changes, moderately
engaged that will bring society closer to what seems a healthy balance of all
factors - towards harmony, not jarring dissonance.
Germany has laws to allow reduction in work hours in a downturn/crisis. This
alleviates the turmoil of redundancy payments, corporate collapses, cents in
the dollar insolvencies....They provide relief amidst crisis (which pass)
then recoup after. By nurturing a stable society they can enjoy better
standards of living - reducing turmoil - destruction of value. Balancing
excesses is the secret to stability.

The issue GFC is based upon the forward selling of credit and profit on such contracts for up to 30 years at rates that now are not realistic. The profits have been booked over the last twelve+ years, (as we see the rich richer) but those booked profits, taken from once future expectations, are now looking more like losses. This leaves a massive cramping of the economic organisation of the World as the profits have been withdrawn-- blood banked by the rich. The Economic dynamic of the World is as the blood loss patient, at the point of organ breakdown, not enough blood supply to the heart to sustain circulation, not enough oxygen to the organs, at the point of catabolic shutdown.
We do need more credit, the authorities have not realised the extreme of the imbalance. Yes, we will need austerity, but we need survival first. We need to avert the damage of shutdown, once stable and recovering, then moderate the drip of credit. Once recovered, then begin the paying back.

The austerity should also be for the rich, but that is a matter for individual governments, and for another time.

R.Steiner in his threefold economy speaks of gift money as being the solution to economic growth, and imaginably it could also be the solution to the euro problems.

In that last weeks flight of capital from Spain et al to safe havens-UK, US, Aus,.. has destabilised bond markets on both sides of the contagion divide I would like to put a case.

Instead of this becoming subvertly a feeding frenzy, where the capitalised west privately buys further into bleeding Spain et al we need something more.

If we, the 99%, in the west could call upon our governments to act towards stabilisation and rebalancing of the economy, and by this to distinctly limit the carnage and plunder, balance could at least be approached consciously-for the common good (as against freemarket capitalism up to now).

The plan would entail more stable countries, where favourably disposed, with balanced QE or by other means, providing buy-up funds for assets or infrastructure in the critical economies. This would strongly support prices and consequently add stability to the troubled banks while also reducing the plunderous aspect of the rapacious global privateers. Such arrangements might be entered into with an exit strategy over the 7 to 14 years expected recovery timeframe, or delivered as an international gift. The latter good will effect would have unsurmised  benefits of gratitude.

There are articles saying "wealth tax"; the problem arises, how can the 0.1% crystalise even 3% of their wealth to pay a wealth tax without shocking asset prices and markets further? 33% would be mayhem. This broken system will and must be fixed gradually and moderately. A more stable approach would be generate credit now, a year in advance of a wealth tax, maybe 1% for 2013, maybe 2% for 2014, and pay back/unmake the generated credit in future in proportion to continued balancing of growth and inflation targets.

The fundamental though is the motive - the intent; where an action is taken with underlying intent of selfishness/greed/getting the better of another, all will tend towards instability.

Where an action is taken with the underlying intention of brotherliness/common humanity/mutual support we will be bringing the stability and moderating influence of trust back into the economy, and trust is what credit is established upon. Gift money imaginably would be very beneficial.

I have felt significant affinity for W.J.Stein and D.N.Dunlop's work for a good 25 years, most notably their efforts towards moderating and harmonising the excesses of the emerging global economy. With the Eu in the throes of a meltdown again this issue comes enormously to the fore.
We can look at the TARP as a massive supply of funds for American banks to buy up world class assets at severely stressed prices , (ie it is an economic assault, a takeover, a conquest, war but in a different sphere) based upon reckless and excessive lending (from the west), then its opposite (drawing in the noose). The massive banker bonuses post 2008 are but an indicator.
The Brits were far more brotherly about bailouts and the profits went largely to the state (BofE). Currently the EU is like a patient with severe blood loss - haemorhaging, and Mario ex Goldman Sachs cries for Austerity (read stingyness and extension of critical period-all to the profit of the cashed up). Understandably Germany does not want to tie themselves up to life support all across the EU, and it likely would still collapse, as it has been unsustainable. In an emergency ward, with such a crisis, there would be a prompt infusion of saline solution, to bring up the fluid balance to a sustainable level, where the heart and other organs are not destructively overstrained. Blood transfusions would follow and stability would ensue promptly. Such in the EU's case is to provide cash, quickly. What we are not clear of is the means of doing this?? By Stein's reckoning, it has to be moral, and it has to be brotherly. There might be many ways to bring cash into the system morally, one could to increasingly provide loans with minimal charges to all Eu citizens in proportion with the tax they have honestly paid in the last 5 years?? Another way would be to establish a communal EU fund that buys up troubled assets across any and all member states. Once again it could be placed in the control of the best investment directors (again according to taxes paid or honest communal donations given). In five years or ten these loans or funds will be able to pay back to the EU their 2012 grant. It is like joseph the dreamer and the pharoah, but in this case we dont have seven fat years to store up protection from. In its place we have hope and trust, that over the years the extended credit will be recovered and payable. Without such an initiative the gulf states and the US megabanks will plunder much of Europe's wealth and likely destroy much culture along the way.
 Further the farm subsidies are reportedly under question, and they do seem exhorbitant and likely do need moderation, but a major cut will greatly increase food prices and as in the last five years with staples unaffordable to all but the Chicago agricultural futures players consider the instabilities that ensued.The process needs maybe ten years of transition planning, ie very gradual incremental reduction to subsidies. Please forward to all others who may be in any position to influence debate or policy. Please also advise me on your views regarding the crisis and any proposals,..

Occupy WS - Credit crisis resolution - Austerity measures

The O.W.S. occupy movement writers indicate that the credit crisis is courtesy of so much wealth gone to the few. Of those few, even less give it away (as in threefold community "gift money") and no pollies dare to tax it back,..
Well that's Democracy for you.
But what would it take to fix the budgets of P.I.G.S. and USA - a commitment for austerity? -
Yes, not for the poor but austerity for the rich.

recycling

9/11 plus 10 - our own back !

oz-uranium depleted in usa,

exploded in iraq,

breathed and ingested by iraqi's,
comes back to us in refugees - boat people (with chronic conditions)

nothing like recycling!

How Well Has The Media And Government Informed The Public About CO2 Levels In The Air?

By Gregg D Thompson
Ask yourself, your friends, family and work associates if they know the answers to the following questions about Carbon Dioxide (CO2). Be sure to write your answers before looking at the following pages.
Question 1. What percentage of the atmosphere do you think is CO2?
Question 2. Have you ever seen the percentage given in any media?
Question 3. What percentage of the CO2 is man-made?
Question 4. What percentage of the man-made CO2 does Australia produce?
Question 5. Is CO2 is a pollutant?
Question 6. Have you ever seen any evidence that CO2 causes a greenhouse effect?
I have asked over 100 people these questions. Virtually everyone says they don’t know the answers so ask them to tell you what their perception is by what they have learnt from the media, the government and Green groups. Let them know there is no right or wrong answer as you are just doing a survey as to what people have perceived the answers to be from these sources.
The answers to these questions are fundamental to evaluating the global warming scare YET almost no one knows the facts. However, without this knowledge we can’t make an informed decision about whether Climate Change is natural or not.
On the following pages are respondent’s perceptions followed by the correct answers. The bulk of the respondents (over 100 to date) are educated fairly well to very well. They comprise business managers in a diversity of large and small companies, those in medical profession, accounting, law, sales, engineering as well as scientists and trades people.

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
Q1. What % of the air is CO2?
Respondent’s Answers: nearly all were 20% - 40%, the highest was 75% while the lowest were 10%- 2%.
The Correct Answer: CO2 is less than a mere four 100ths of 1%! As a decimal it is 0.038%. As a fraction it is 1/27th of 1%. (Measurements for CO2 vary from one source to another from 0.036%- 0.039% due to the difficulty in measuring such a small quantity and due to changes in wind direction e.g. whether the air flow is from an industrialized region or a volcanic emission etc)
Nitrogen is just over 78%, Oxygen is just under 21% and Argon is almost 1%. CO2 is a minute trace gas at 0.038%. We all learnt the composition of the air in both primary and high school but because most people don’t use science in their day to day living, they have forgotten this. Also, the vast bulk of the population have very little knowledge of science so they find it impossible to make judgements about even basic scientific issues let alone ones as complex as climate. This makes it easy for those with agendas to deceive us by using emotive statements rather than facts. For a detailed breakup of the atmosphere go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth#Composition
Q2. Have you seen a percentage for CO2 given in the media?
Respondent’s answers: All said ’No’.
Q3. What % of CO2 do humans produce?
Respondent’s answers ranged from as high as 100% with most estimating it to be between 75% to 25% and only four said they thought it was between 10% and 2 %.
The Correct Answer: Nature produces nearly all of it. Humans produce only 3%. As a decimal it is a miniscule 0.001% of the air. All of mankind produces only one molecule of CO2 in around every 90,000 air molecules! Yes, that’s all.
Q4. What % of man-made CO2 does Australia produce?
Respondent’s Answers ranged from 20% to 5%.
The Correct Answer is 1% of the 0.001% of man-made CO2. As a decimal it is an insignificant 0.00001% of the air. That’s one, one-hundredth thousandth of the air. That is what all the fuss is about! That’s one CO2 molecule from Australia in every 9,000,000 molecules of air. It has absolutely no affect at all.
We have been grossly misled to think there is tens of thousands of times as much CO2 as there is!
Why has such important information been withheld from the public? If the public were aware that man-made CO2 is so incredibly small there would be very little belief in a climate disaster so the media would not be able to make a bonanza from years of high sales by selling doomsday stories. Governments and Green groups would not be able to justify a carbon tax that will greatly raise the cost of everything. Major international banks and the stock market would not make massive profits out of carbon trading and many in the science community would not be getting large research grants.
Q5. Is CO2 is a pollutant?
Respondent’s Answers: All thought it was a pollutant, at least to some degree.
The Correct Answer: CO2 is a harmless, trace gas. It is as necessary for life - just as oxygen and nitrogen are. It is a natural gas that is clear, tasteless and odourless. It is in no way a pollutant.
Calling CO2 a ‘pollutant’ leads many to wrongly think of it as black, grey or white smoke. Because the media deceitfully show white or grey ‘smoke’ coming out of power station cooling towers, most think this is CO2. It is not: it’s just steam (water vapour) condensing in the air. CO2 is invisible: just breathe out and see. Look at it bubbling out of your soft drinks, beer or sparkling wine. No one considers that a pollutant - because it’s not. CO2 in its frozen state is commonly known as dry ice. It is used in camping eskys, in medical treatments and science experiments. No one considers that a pollutant either. CO2 is emitted from all plants. This ‘emission’ is not considered a pollutant even though this alone is 33 times more than man produces! Huge quantities of CO2 are dissolved naturally in the ocean and released from the warm surface. This is not considered a pollutant either.

The two large cooling towers are emitting only steam. A tiny amount of CO2 is trickling out of the thin chimney at centre. It is only barely visible due to a small quantity of smoke particles, most of which is filtered out nowadays. The media doesn’t like to show skinny CO2 chimneys emitting nothing visible because this is unimpressive and not the least bit emotive so it doesn’t make for sensationalist journalism. So they typically choose to deceive the public by showing cooling towers.

Q6. Have you seen any evidence that CO2 causes a greenhouse effect?
Respondent’s Answers: Most did not know of any definite proof. Some said they thought the melting of the Arctic and glaciers was possibly proof.
The Correct Answer: There is no proof at all. The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (the IPCC) has never produced any proof. There are, however the following proofs that it can’t cause a greenhouse effect.
• It is true that CO2 can absorb heat a little faster than nitrogen and oxygen but it becomes no hotter because it cannot absorb anymore heat than there is available to the other gases. This is against the laws of thermodynamics. All gases share their heat with the other gases. Gas molecules fly around and are constantly colliding with other gas molecules so they immediately lose any excess heat to other molecules during these collisions. That’s why the air is all one temperature in any limited volume.
• Even if CO2 levels were many times higher, radiative heating physics shows that it would make virtually no difference to temperature because it has a very limited heating ability. With CO2, the more there is, the less it heats because it quickly becomes saturated. For a detailed explanation go to: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
The following facts show that even high levels of CO2 can make almost no impact on heating the atmosphere.
1. Glasshouses with high levels of CO2 - hundreds of times higher than in the air to make plants grow faster – heat up during the day to the same temperature as glasshouses with air in them. This is also true for bottles of pure CO2 compared to ones with air.
2. The planets Venus and Mars have atmospheres that are almost entirely CO2 (97%) yet they have no ‘runaway’ greenhouse heating effect. Their temperatures are stable.
3. The geological record over hundreds of millions of years has shown that CO2 has had no affect whatsoever on climate. At times, CO2 was hundreds of times higher, yet there were ice ages.
4. In recent times when Earth was considerably warmer during the Roman Warming and the Medieval Warming, the higher temperatures then were totally natural because there was no industrialization back then.
• Water vapour is 4% of the air and that‘s 100 times as much as CO2. Water vapour absorbs 33 times as much heat as CO2 making CO2’s contribution insignificant. But like CO2, water vapour also gives this heat away to air molecules by contact (conduction) and radiation, thereby making the surrounding air the same temperature.
• The Earth’s atmosphere is very thin so its heat is continually being lost to the absolute coldness of outer space (-270 C). As there is no ‘ceiling’ to the atmosphere, surface heat cannot be retained. The Sun renews warmth every day.
Over the last few years Earth has had much colder winters due to very few magnetic storms on the Sun. These four increasingly colder winters have been particularly noticeable in the northern hemisphere where most of the land is. Because of this, the Arctic has re-frozen and glaciers that were receding are now surging due to the heavy snow falls. The Arctic showed some melting around its edges from the mid 90s to the mid 2000s due to the very high level of solar storm activity at that time. But as the Sun is now entering probably 2-4 decades of low solar activity, this is expected to cause global cooling. For more detail, see the following page.
The climate has always been naturally cyclic and variable due to numerous natural drivers of which CO2 is not one. Over millions of years the climate has shown far greater changes in the geological record than we have seen over the last 200 hundred years - and there was no industrialization back then. The very minor variations we have witnessed over the last 100 years have all occurred several times even in that short period. Today’s changes in climate are common and completely natural. There are now over 50 books that provide numerous reasons why man-made global warming is false.
The Effect of the Sun on Earth’s climate
It has long been known that the Sun is by far the major driver of all weather on Earth because it is the source of all heat and energy. There is absolutely no real-world evidence that the temperature has continually risen as we were led to believe. The hottest records in the USA and Greenland were in the 1930s due to a strong solar cycle. It became cooler from 1940 to 1970. This was due to a weak solar cycle. It has again become increasingly colder since 2006 due to another weak solar cycle. The Sun’s magnetic storm activity has now moved to an extended minimum so the next 2-4 maximums are expected to be much weaker than the last few have been. By 2011 the solar cycle should have risen half way back to its 11 year maximum but it hasn’t! It’s only just started. The last time the Sun acted this way was during the Dalton Minimum from 1790 to 1830 which produced 40 years of very cold winters with subdued, wetter summers globally - just as we are expiring now. From 1450 -1750 a more intense Maunder Minimum occurred which caused the Little Ice Age. The next 2-4 solar cycles will very likely be low in solar activity causing noticeably cooler global temperatures for a few decades.
For details see: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/02/solar-cycle-24-update
and http://www.climatechangedenier.com.au/climate-change/another-dalton-minimum/
The effect of the current Solar Minimum is particularly obvious in the northern hemisphere where increasingly colder winter temperatures have caused massive snow falls disrupting transportation across Europe, Asia and the US.
Despite more than a decade of continual doomsday predictions of increasing temperatures and never-ending drought globally, the opposite has happened. There have been lower temperatures globally with greatly increased rain and snows over much of the planet since 2006. This has caused floods across most of Australia and most other counties, as seen on the TV news. This ended the global 10 year drought conditions from the mid 90s to the mid 2000s. There has been no drop in CO2 to cause this: in fact, CO2 has risen. There is no correlation between CO2 levels and climate. The reason CO2 levels have gone up a little is most likely due to the surface of the oceans warming very slightly during the later half of the century and therefore releasing a little CO2. (The oceans are currently cooling very slightly.) Mankind’s contribution to CO2 is so small it’s not measurable.
Polls on Climate Change
Polls in western countries now show that believers in man-made global warming are now in the minority with a sizable percentage of over 20% who “don’t know” if CO2 is causing any change. The obvious change to a cooler, wetter climate combined with the revelations of climate fraud shown by the Climategate emails has led to the change in public perception. Polls asking people what is the most important threat to them out of a list of 20 issues, place global warming at the bottom!
Popular beliefs are not fact
The bulk of the population of the western world believed that the 2000 Bug would destroy much of our technology on New Year’s Eve 2000 yet not one disaster occurred anywhere. We were told CFCs caused the Ozone ‘hole’ yet after billions of dollars were spent removing CFCs over 30 years, the slight depletion of Ozone at the South Pole has not changed. Scientists now think it is natural. Popular beliefs are often based on blind faith, ideology and profit rather than proven scientific evidence. History is littered with popular consensuses that were wrong.
A Carbon Tax
Taxing CO2 achieves nothing for the environment; in fact, it deprives real environmental issues from receiving funds. A carbon tax will have a disastrous impact on lower and middle income earners. Even if drastic measures were imposed equally on all countries around the world to reduce the total human CO2 contribution by as much as 30%, this would reduce total CO2 by an insignificant percentage. It would have no affect whatsoever on the climate but it would totally destroy the economies of every country and dramatically lower everyone’s living standards. Most people and politicians are making decisions emotively, not factually about a complex science they know virtually nothing about.
Gregg D Thompson
Climate Researcher
Astronomer
Environmentalist
Author of two science books
Business Manager and Director of 3 companies
Author of science magazine articles
Designer and project manager of special effects attractions
Nature photographer
Has a great interest in most sciences
Loves creating innovation in art