Yes, we all wish we didn’t need to protest, but it’s a small price to pay for living in one of the best nations on Earth. If we don’t stop this slide now, corruption and inefficiency grow stronger, and we will all be poorer in every sense of the word.
We don’t have to have a carbon tax. We don’t have to work for part of every day in order to prepare Australia for a threat that the evidence suggests is a non-event, and that most nations are not taking seriously.
Melbourne – Sunday June 19th !! 12:30 NOW
UPDATE: Bolt has this listed as “a rally against the carbon dioxide tax tomorrow outside Melbourne’s Parliament House at 12.30pm. Advertised speakers include the Nationals’ Barnaby Joyce and the Liberals’ Sophie Mirabella.”
1 pm outside Victorian Parliament, (see Facebook)
NSW CENTRAL COAST — REVOLTING CO2 TAX
Sunday, June 26, 1:00pm – 2:30pm,
Gosford Waterfront
Dane Drive (next to the Gosford Swimming Pool)
Note: Rally date confirmed Sunday 26 June. Venue is still being finalised with Council and will be published as soon as possible. Volunteers please email Darren info.CCCACT@gmail.com
Sydney Friday, 1 July,
1pm, outside the Greens Sydney HQ, (CATA)
Sydney — Saturday July 9th
Hyde Park. Monckton, Evans and Jo Nova. Details to follow as they are made available.
THE HUNTER VALLEY — SAYING NO TO THE CARBON TAX RALLY
Saturday, 2nd July 2011 1pm Foreshore Park, Newcastle Facebook
Tamworth
Sunday 14th of August in . (CATA)
Wagga — moves are afoot to get a rally started. If you can help or are interested in coming, please add a comment on the thread or email me at joanne AT this blog right here.
Monckton Tour
The Monckton tour : see the post for all the details. Don’t miss out on a place. Everything in 2010 booked out.
Vaclav Klaus
The President of the Czech Republic and author of Blue Planet in Green Shackles shall be visiting Australia also in July. He’ll be speaking both in Sydney and in Perth. [See here].
CarbonReferendum.com has attracted over 25,000 signatures calling for a vote to let people decide on whether we want a carbon tax or not… again, worth getting friends to sign
Thanks to No Carbon Tax, and StopGillardsCarbonTax for some of these details.
Now is the time to really push the ALP into reconsidering, and show them we mean business. Once this tax is in, it will be devilishly hard to unwind. (The Liberals would have to maintain-the-determination, and win, and control the Senate). Once a trading scheme is started it will create patrons and positions that can’t be unwound. Most insidiously, all of these bad-choice policies give strength to the organizations and people who created this false scare. We feed the hand that holds us back.
UPDATE: GetUp needs your advice.
PLUS don’t forget to put some votes in here to help our pals at GetUp get focused on the right issues. I did. Thanks MadJak!
MadJak:
June 18th, 2011 at 10:04 am edit
Just a reminder to everyone,
If you haven’t allready put up 3 votes on the following getup site, please do so. They’re obviously seeing it as a bit of a threat with some of the catastrafarians starting to pay attention to it:
Darren informs me that the Central Coast Rally will be:
Venue: Gosford Waterfront
Dane Drive (next to the Gosford Swimming Pool)
Sunday, 26 June 2011 – 1pm to 2.30pm
Regards
Darren
Noted. Thanks! – JN
10
You Australians need to realise that you are up against a bunch of corrupt psychopaths who will do anything to pursue their agenda.
Stop pussy-footing about.
Do what Chopper says – Harden the **** Up.
10
Let’s be very clear about this …
The so-called carbon tax has absolutely nothing to do with climate, or science, or anything else that is rational. It is all about political pay-back.
From what we can make out, this proposed tax is a levy imposed by the United Nations on all of the former first world countries, under the guise of “saving the planet” and/or “helping the poorer nations”, i.e. the former third world countries, to respond to climate change. The distinction on who is being pressured to pay this levy is important.
To understand this, we need to understand the, now outdated, “world alignments”:
During the cold war, the “first world” consisted with the group of nations that were economically and militarily aligned with the USA. It was, and is, also referred to as “the west”, although the inclusion of Australia and New Zealand in that group belies that name.
The “second world” (a name that is now curiously missing from any MSM reporting) was the group of countries that were economically and militarily aligned with the USSR. It used to be referred to as “eastern europe”, another misnomer since the geography spread to the north pole and took in a sizable chunk of Asia. It also included Cuba, which is hardly to the east of Washington.
The “third world” was then defined as any country that was not aligned with either of the other two groups. This included the poorer nations in Africa, but also included the more affluent nations in South America and Asia, and even the very wealthy nations in the Arabian peninsular. So the “three world construction” has nothing to do with economics, it was, and is, a political construction.
The propaganda industry, through the willing or unwitting services of the MSM, has morphed the concept of the “third world” to mean “poorer nations”, but when used by the United Nations, the term still retains its original meaning, as do all references to “first world countries”!
A phrase that sticks in my mind was a quote to the affect that, “The first world countries owe an economic debt to the rest of the world” – not an “ecological debt”, but an “economic” one. [I am kicking myself that I didn’t record the reference, for it was a Freudian slip.]
If you want a conspiracy theory: a lot of the drive for carbon taxes come from the NGO’s who, as we have seen, are dominated by socialist (or even communist) philosophy. The economic disparity between the first and second world economies was very apparent once the restrictions imposed by the cold war were removed, and are still evident today, a generation further on.
This economic disparity is the major driver behind the carbon scam. The United Nations is well aware that a common driver for war is economic disparity, and being in the front-line, historically, the European Union is absolutely paranoid about it (after all, it is lead by a Belgian – and Belgium is the most frequently occupied country in the world). The United Nations, are therefore demanding money from former first-world countries which will be redirected in order to remove many of the economic imbalances with the former second-world countries. The former third-world countries will miss out on this, as they always seem to do anyway.
Whether the weather gets warmer or colder will not slow the progress of this one iota.
The real questions are around how each country responds to the United Nations demands. New Zealand has chosen to impose a tax that impacts across the population in terms of increased domestic prices, but does not affect the countries competitive positioning in primary production. Australia, which is much more socialist, appears to have chosen to attack the largest money source – the mining industry. This will prove to be a spectacular mistake, but as they say, “You can take a Hor-ti-culture, but you can’t make her think”.
10
I will be at the 2 Sydney ones.
10
The coming ice age (Solar minimum) will probably stop all this will take 10 to 20 years but it will happen. This is THE ONLY CONCRETE climate data that now exists and it is an extraordinary coincidence that we are living to see it. Check AMSU satellite data sea surface its free falling, should be now rising after La Nina Finished.This is highly speculative but may be relevant….
10
I think it will not happen and if it does it will be unwinded by next governement. Be sure to get Citizenship in warmer climes!
10
This post gets two mentions on EUReferendum, about a wave of political protests throughout the world.
And then, following an explanation that most of these demonstrations around the world are about preserving Government sponsored privileges, the piece continues with:
So, there you go. Australia advancing to be fair.
10
Just a reminder to everyone,
If you haven’t allready put up 3 votes on the following getup site, please do so. They’re obviously seeing it as a bit of a threat with some of the catastrafarians starting to pay attention to it:
Double Tap the Zombies here
10
I just had a look through the footage of the rallies in Canberra, Sydney, Brisbane and Port Macquarie. Besides some snide remarks by the media covering the events. I want to tell you guys that it filled my heart with such elation and pride.
Proud to be Australian, proud to have a voice and proud of the stature of the people and the civility they showed at all the rallies.
I want to commend everyone that attended and praise the organizers for supporting the premise that we are in a Democracy and that the people have a voice.
Thankyou everyone for the fight which will be remembered as I believe history will reveal.
A truly inspiring effort once again thankyou my fellow Australians.
In the words of a great Australian, Jeff Fenech “I love youse all”
So let’s stick it to these traiterous, dictatorial, marxist swin that have stolen our voice.
10
time for everyone to unite, no matter what your politics are:
17 June: Weekly Times Now: Brian Clancy: Carbon tax to cost farmers $6000
The additional costs have been projected by the Australian Farm Institute in a report which modelled the impact of three scenarios for an economy-wide carbon price…
The institute’s report provided further ammunition to the National Farmers Federation and the Sheepmeat Council of Australia to reject a carbon tax.
“This is not something the industry is going to take lying down,” said NFF president Jock Laurie.
“This is about ensuring the long-term sustainability of an industry that is charged with feeding Australia and the world…
Sheepmeat Council president Kate Joseph said sheepmeat producers would struggle to survive under such losses.
“If the Government was serious about food security, it would encourage an increase in the capacity of Australian farmers to produce more and build resilience in the farming sector,” Ms Joseph said.
“We are joining with the NFF to call for the carbon tax to be rejected and we encourage all of those who believe in a fair go for our farmers to do the same.”
The research paper is available at http://www.nff.org.au
http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/article/2011/06/17/344921_sheep.html
10
Pat @ 10
But…but Juliar said a Carbon Tax would be the best outcome for all Australian’s.
Under that premise the NFF must not be Australian!
Say No to a Carbon tax .. Say yes to an election !
10
having trouble posting on WUWT today, so apologie for being O/T, but it’s so good to see Big Mac getting some MSM kudos:
17 June: Washington Times Editorial: EDITORIAL: U.N. climate propaganda exposed
Industry lobbyists behind ‘scientific’ claims in IPCC press release
Since this statement was supposedly based on actual scientific research, Steve McIntyre, editor of the Climate Audit blog, did what the IPCC must have assumed nobody would bother doing. He checked the sources cited in the report…
That’s why the Environmental Protection Agency needs to pull the plug on the job-crushing cap-and-trade style regulations it seeks to impose. The agency based the whole of its “endangerment finding” on the work of IPCC, as if it were scientific. It would be more honest for the EPA to say its rules are based on the desire of Greenpeace and the renewable-energy industry to raise taxes on competing sources of electricity. They shouldn’t be allowed to get away with this fraud.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/17/un-climate-propaganda-exposed/
17 June: Economist: The IPCC and Greenpeace
Renewable outrage
Steve McIntyre, who runs a blog on which he tries to hold climate science to higher standards than he sees it holding itself, picked up all these IPCC/Greenpeace connections and posted on them angrily, calling for all involved to be sacked. “As a citizen,” he says, “I would like to know how much weight we can put on renewables as a big-footprint solution. Prior to the IPCC report, I was aware that Greenpeace—and WWF—had promoted high renewable scenarios. However, before placing any weight on them, the realism of these scenarios needs to be closely examined. IPCC has a mandate to provide hard information but did no critical evaluation of the Greenpeace scenario.”
His desire for solid, honest answers is plainly one to be shared…
But the press release which focuses on an outlier, not on the range of options, is also and more worryingly the sort of mistake you get in organisations that assume everyone wants to hear the party line…
http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/06/ipcc-and-greenpeace
17 June: Reason: Ronald Bailey: A Bad Week for Climate Change Alarmists*
This statement comes from an IPCC press release. The study on which the claim was made wasn’t made public until a month later. By then the media had moved on, and the meme that renewables could solve climate change by 2050 launched. What McIntyre found was that the scenario highlighted in the press release was ulitmately derived from a report issued jointly by Greenpeace and the European Renewable Energy Council. That’s right – activists and lobbyists collaborating. Who would have thought?…
The second foot-shooting occurred when it was discovered that climate change researchers at the University of Colorado have been quietly adjusting the figures for sea level rise…
Nerem replies that the adjustment adds just an inch over a century to the figures which doesn’t amount to all that much when computer models project that the future rise is sea level will be 2 to 4 feet over the coming century.
Now Nerem says that his group is thinking about making both the adjusted and unadjusted data public. Well, yes…
http://reason.com/blog/2011/06/17/a-bad-week-for-climate-change
10
Pat @ 12
I can’t seem to get your third link to work
10
Sunday, 19 June, Melbourne rally. Don’t forget in the morning, at 10 am, The Bolt Report, on Channel 10 TV, which will have an old colleague Mark Textor as one guest. Mark has a keen, analytical mind.
10
Wish I could be there, standing shoulder to shoulder with you. Good luck, chaps and chapesses.
10
Jo,
The “See the PDF..” link for the new Perth appearance is not working. Any chance of having a look at it? Cheers.
[Fixed! Thanks 🙂 JN]
10
Big week for the catastrafarian movements demise…..
First the revelation the sun is, well, taking a break….
Then Greenpeace gate
And now… revelations of fudging sea level rise data by climate scientists
Ohhh, the shame…… the shame….. go and eat some more carbon free food guys…..
10
Hey I got interviewed as a man in the street today, by a couple of students who looked like they were doing a documentary or something – or maybe a psychology project. Anyway, they had all the professional video gear. I was just wandering along when one of them approached me and asked if I would take part. The qualifying question was “what makes you angry?”
Well I couldn’t pass up an opportunity like that so straight away I said “the carbon tax”. He said “OK”, obviously approving that as an answer and got me into position. I took off my sunglasses and with the camera going repeated my answer “the government’s proposed carbon tax”.
“Why?”
“Because carbon dioxide is not pollution. We are going to be taxed on the air we breathe in and out.”
That was it. Interview over. I suspect they couldn’t think of a follow-up question. They thanked me and I went on my way.
Goodness knows where it will end up, but it made my day!
10
I love my sunburnt country,
where we all get a fair go.
But there’s something big a-foot,
…which you desperately must know.
We stopped teaching our kids history.
Now everything seems new.
The science theory of the day,
Is simply taken to be true.
We forget how back in 1915
some folk from Swan Hill township,
walked onto the dried up Murray
for a round or two of cricket.
Don’t tell me this was caused by
CFC refrigerators.
Dupont didn’t sell this type of fridge
’til a good 16 years later.
The media like to beat up things
like cyclones and bush-fires.
They run to tell the king their scoop
of the falling of the skies.
“These latest tragedies which leave
our nation so bereft,
Are the worst we’ve ever seen”…
‘Cause now they’re available in Hi-Def
Something which I have noticed
which to me, seems rather strange,
is how the “proof” of Global Warming
morphed into Climate Change
You’re entitled to your opinion
if you’re a doctoral smarty-pants.
But if you don’t agree with the pollies,
don’t expect any government grants
Don’t get me started on accountants,
who think a tax can save the earth.
It seems to me the prime targets,
Always dodge it with cunning mirth.
The rest of us are lumped with filling
the taxation short-fall.
The cost of living changes,
but nothing else at all
So I love this awesome nation,
A land of weather extremes.
Just don’t let a stinking carbon tax
ruin all our dreams.
10
More propaganda from the abc’s dumb:
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2761976.html
10
How do I go about organising one of these protests in Wagga Wagga. I don’t do facebook and am not aligned to any advocacy groups.
10
From the Lynas blog
A little logical for most greens but struck a cord with me .
Harold Pierce Jr says:
18 June 2011 at 1:08 am
Helllo Mark!
NOW PAY ATTENTION!
Re: Fossil Fuel Are Forever!
Harold the Chemist says:
Boats, planes, freight trucks and trains, military and emergency vehicles, heavy machinery used agriculture, construction, forestry and mining, cars and light trucks with spirit and muscle, recreational vehicles, and so forth will always require and use hydrocarbon fuels because these fuels have high energy density and are readily and primarily prepared from abundant crude oil, which exists free in Nature, by fractional distillation and blending of the distillate fractions, low energy processes which do not involve the breaking of chemical bonds. Even catalytic cracking of the heavy distillate fractions into lighter fractions for fuel formulation is a relative low energy process.
In the heavy industries, only fossil fuels can supply the enormous amount raw heat energy and high process temperatures either directy or indirectly (e.g. the electric furnace) required by lime and cement kilns, smelters, steel mills, foundries and metal casting plants, all facilities manufacturing ceramic materials (glass, bricks, tiles, porcelin ware, etc), refineries and chemical plants and so forth.
Diesel-electrical generating systems are used extensively throughout the world for primary and back-up power and for power generation in many delveloping countries and at remote locations (e.g., diamond and gold mines, resort islands, drilling rigs, movie sets, etc). Electrical generators using gasoline are quite portable and are used for small snd modest power requriments.
Many processes in food production require large amounts of heat for baking, cooking and steam for sterilization, etc which can provided economically by fossil fuels. Drying of grain for storage requires enormous amounts of heat which can only be provided economically by fossils fuels.
Energy for space heating especially in cold climates and hot water production and for electricity generation, in particular for refrigeration, communication systems, hospitals and emergency services, is provided most reliably and economically by use of fossil fuels.
Factoids: A Boeing 747 takes off with 346,000 pounds of fuel for a long intl. fight. At large airports big jet are more numerous that house sparrows. The Emma Maersk is largest container-carrying ahip ever built and burns 45,000 liters of diesel fuel per hour.
The most wasteful use of energy is diamond mining. Tons of ore are sometimes processed to obtain a few carats of rough diamonds. About 80% of gold production goes to the jewerly industry.
Who amongest you wants to tell the ladies, “No more diamonds, gold, sliver, platinium, rubies, emeralds for jewerly.” In NYC. they would become outraged, ponce on you, take off the Pradas and pound you into hamburger which they would feed with glee to coyotoes in Central Park!
I don’t want read any more foolish comments about getting rid of fossil fuels. Ain’t ever going to happen.
Nicely put .. I think.. Also something to transition from over many decades , not years ! Reality what a bummer for some .
10
@3
Australia, which is much more socialist, appears to have chosen to attack the largest money source – the mining industry. This will prove to be a spectacular mistake,
Oh how true , could not agree more , after the mining industry has finished showing this govt up for the liars they are , They at least will be political poison , you would think after twelve years in opposition going for twenty four is a bit of an own goal .
It is only our patriotic duty to assist this in any way possible ,!
10
O/T but forgive — this is interesting.
Australian medical doctor D Weston Allen has released “The Weather Makers Re-Examined”, a book in which he picks over Flannery’s 2005 “The Weather Makers”.
I’m only halfway through it, but so far he’s doing a really good job of rubbishing our very-well-paid-for-a-part-time-job Climate Commissioner.
The book is heavily referenced with credible rebuttals to AGW alarmists on almost every score — a very handy source indeed. For those interested, go to the publishers website:
http://www.irenicpublications.com.au
It’s a very good companion piece to Ian Plimer’s excellent tome.
Get it out there!
But be warned — you’ll feel obliged to buy Flannery’s drivel just to compare and contrast. And, boy, I really hate the idea of putting royalties Tim’s way.
10
@Rereke Whakaaro: #3
“…this proposed tax is a levy imposed by the United Nations on all of the former first world countries, under the guise of “saving the planet” and/or “helping the poorer nations”, i.e. the former third world countries, to respond to climate change”
Top Post Rereke
.
I would like to add that Australia, in 1997, the advent of Kyoto, was very borderline for being considered a ‘First World’ (or Annex A) country.
It is a shame that 10 years later, when Kevin 747 signed us up to Kyoto, we were at the height of a boom and dear Kev convinced the UN that, ‘Australian Taxpayers’ didn’t need any assistance – in fact we were so ‘well off’ that we could financially support the 2nd and 3rd world countries (Annex B & Developing)
You are spot on in your conclusion (“this proposed tax is a levy imposed by the United Nations”), you only have to take a look at the doubling of our Foreign Aid budget ($4 Billion) to prove it.
The UN basically said – If you don’t have a ‘Carbon Tax’ or ETS then give us the money we need for our $100 Billion a year ‘Green Fund’ from your budget.
(That is why Gillard is so adamant about the TAX – Combet signed us up to it in Cancun and God forbid that we do not have a Budget Surplus by 2013)
.
It is ironic that the funds we send to the UN are used to abate ‘Carbon’ in developing countries, by planting trees. (wasn’t that an LNP policy that has just been ridiculed by the ALP, Garnaut and the Produtivity Comission ?)
Under the UN, it has proved to be a miserable failure of a policy, and most of the money the ‘ETS countries” invested in it, to get ‘Carbon Credits’, is now lost. (A bit like Pink Batts on steroids)
They chose Honduras as a site to plant all their trees in.
OOPS (demography lesson) – the local mafia thought this was brilliant, they could, threaten. maime, and even kill farmers to get hold of the land required to grow trees for UN ‘Carbon’ credits.
(Google UN + Honduras)
Now the UN has declared these ‘Carbon Credits’ worthless – Killing and Maiming was not a ‘Good Look’, but hey, why should they loose any sleep over it, It wasn’t their money they were spending.
10
Thanks for your comments, corrections and info. I have added notes to the post, and sent an email to grumpy.
Anyone else want to organize something in your area? Why not add a commment, and we’ll see if we can connect you with good people in your area.
10
6Abradacio:
June 18th, 2011 at 9:06 am
Much as I admire your optimism that almost never happens. Governments don’t repeal taxes set up by previous administrations. They just milk them for political capital while talking of reducing them but keeping them as s monument the folly of the ‘last lot’, while finding the extra income very handy though for a few more tax payer funded dinners.
10
Picked this headline up on the Drudge Report. The second URL is on the same page as are a few older articles about claimed sea level rises.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/17/research-center-under-fire-for-adjusted-sea-level-data/
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/06/nasa-to-measure-saltiness-sea-from-space/
10
It is terrific to see that we are once again able to vocally and visually demonstrate our opposition to a ‘Carbon Tax’
I deliberately said visually, because some of the signage at the last ‘No Carbon Tax’ rally was not overly helpful in gaining continued political support for our cause.
(Ditch the Witch – over Tony Abbots head is neither helpful for him or us)
It has always been my opinion that we needed a three pronged attack:
SCIENCE
ECONOMICS
POLITICS
The SCIENCE lobby has done a phenomenal job of raising doubt and getting general awareness out to the public.
(It needs to be kept simple and hard hitting – even I, as a regular to this site, don’t understand some of the stuff you guys are saying)
The ECONOMICS are probably the force of the moment, people are running scared, and with good cause.
If you read Garnaut carefully, $Billions are allocated for Lost Jobs, Destroyed Communities, and Failure of the Power sector.
We cannot stress the ECONOMIC Impact enough at the moment, it is a ‘tipping point’.
($12 Million on adverising the TAX, whilst our Pollies and CEO’s are sleeping rough to raise just $4 Million for our Homeless – and they think it is ‘Chicken Feed’)
Again – The message needs to be simple.
(It is an area where I personally get carried away, I am too close to the problem to explain it simply, even my ‘convert’ family give me quizzical looks when I start quoting numbers.)
The POLITICS is where, if we have done our job, the Politicians who have sympathetic veiws, will find it easier to put the debate to the people.
(It is doubtful that we can make any impression on the ALP, Greens or Independants directly – but it is still worth trying – Tony Windsor sold Half the Farm to a Coal Mine – He is probably negotiating at the moment, in the MPCCC, to use the other half for ‘Carbon Sequestration’)
Enough of my Rant.
Good luck all at the Rallies.
(We are with you in spirit)
10
Well, what can I say, you guys are on a roll!
I’m waiting for the new ice age with keen anticipation. I’m looking forward to rain returning to Perth.
And to think, you’ve achieved all this by just talking about it…..
10
@John Brookes: #30
“Well, what can I say, you guys are on a roll!”
Better believe it John – Want to join us ?
The number of panicked ‘Greenie’ posts at the ‘Australian’ site recently proves it.
Come over fron the ‘Dark Side’ whilst you still can.
We will forgive you John.
10
@John Brookes: #30
“I’m waiting for the new ice age with keen anticipation. I’m looking forward to rain returning to Perth.”
Where the !!!! have you been recently John, certainly not in Perth.
It’s been persisting down all week here.
AND it’s bloody near Freezing.
PS
Does it rain in an ‘Ice Age’ – I really don’t know – forgive my ignorance.
BTW
I forgive yours.
10
@John Brookes: #30
“And to think, you’ve achieved all this by just talking about it…..”
So – You think we could have acheived more by TAXING it ???
I think Tasmania might need your expertise John, they are in recession and about to implement ‘Austerity’ measures.
I am sure you can help your ‘Green’ freinds out of the ‘Tree Hugging’ hole they have dug for themselves.
PS
Don’t worry about Perth for now, Tasmania (Bob & Christine) needs you more than we do.
10
TrueNews@25
Brilliant
The commissariat of the UN appoints itself powers to declare instruments of the new ‘currency’ worthless.
Look out all you feed-in tariff entrepreneurs in NSW and elsewhere.
That’s what happens when socialists get charge of Other people’s money to spend. They’re not half as careful as people who’ve had to earn it.
10
Will Gray @ 20. Against my better judgement I went to the article you highlighted at:
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2761976.html
Oh dear, what a terribly amateurish piece of propaganda. If this is the best our Universities and the CSIRO can put out, then the Government should cease all funding immediately. This article reads like a paper put together by a bunch of leftist art students after summarising the Greenpeace papers referenced by the IPCC.
Any claims by the self designated ‘Climate Scientists’, (among which palaeontologist Tim Flannery, master of the many failed climate predictions, is so often included), has little credibility regardless of how many incestuously peer-reviewed papers they produce.
These same so called climate scientists readily accepted Michael Mann’s so obviously incorrect reconstruction of the global temperature history, which was published ad nausea in IPCC reports and other peer-reviewed scientific literature. Because of their lack of scientific scrutiny, I would be embarrassed to be included in their ranks.
They are such clever climate scientists they did not think to ask what happened to the Medieval Warm Period, or the Little Ice Age which Mann’s graphs conveniently made disappear.
This disappearing act enabled Mann to ‘prove’ recent temperatures were unprecedented – which Al Gore used to anchor his Academy and Nobel award winning piece, ‘An Inconvenient Truth’. Now that’s irony!
Not even our great Australian Universities nor the CSIRO, both now overflowing with global-warming-gravy-train-funded-climate-scientists, questioned this history altering graph in the IPCC documents.
Real scientist who did raise questions were shouted down, ridiculed and called climate deniers. In fact it took a none climate scientist, indeed ‘just’ a statistician, and years of battling the IPCC aligned climate science bureaucracy, to prove Mann’s graph was wrong, as were the IPCC and all those ‘climate scientists’ and all those ‘peer-reviewed’ papers.
Guess what? That statistician didn’t have a single peer-reviewed climate science paper to his name yet he proved all those published ‘climate scientists’ to be the fools or frauds that they are.
So if the best the so called climate scientists who wrote this piece at The drum Unleashed can do to counter scientists who disagree with them, is to point to a lack of ‘climate science’ peer reviewed papers, then I would say they are focussing on the wrong thing.
These ‘climate scientists and the CSIRO should instead get off their well funded bums and address the well founded criticisms raised by their detractors. Included among those who do not accept their climate change dogma are scientists who happen to be well qualified and published in the hard sciences as well as earth sciences.
To point out their critics haven’t published any ‘climate science’ peer reviewed papers is irrelevant to the science. I say, so what? That single statistician who made fools of them all hadn’t either.
10
Melbourne – Sunday June 19th !! 12:30
That Facebook link in the main article to this event isn’t working.
10
So Brooksie … do you get paid to troll or is it simply a hobby? The former I could understand, the latter too sad to contemplate.
10
Hi all, i went to that crap site the ABC Drum and yes very ameturish indeed, been up for 24 hours now and no comments. Makes me wonder if anyone reads it?
As i am an American in Texas, i will not be able to participate in rallys but my thoughts will be with you, and good luck to all in your fight.
O/T but i have not seen anything from Baa Humbug in a good while hope all right for him, i miss his insight and wit here and other blogs.
10
John Brookes, with your comment on waiting for rain in Perth and True North calling you on it in comment #32, i think you have just proved that you still live with your parents in thier basement and do not get out much!
10
John Brookes,
Please put up some more comments on the getup forum like the following one you did:
Maybe you might like to put up a link to the 10:10 splattergate snuff fantasy while you’re at it? You never know, if you find it funny, maybe some other people will too and not vote.
Go for your life. Each time you post comments like that the votes just keep on coming faster.
We’re halfway towards having more votes than the opposite request on Getup for the carbon tax.
10
I hope that you all keep in mind the way Gillard thinks. See:
http://www.skynews.co.nz/national/article.aspx?id=627140&vId=2494056&cId=National&play=true
Where she states:
‘I feel very secure. I have a plan for this country’s future and my caucus colleagues are working with me to deliver that plan.’
Gillard went berserk with her carbon tax plans after her visit to New Zealand. I believe that she must have gained her new found enthusiasm from talking to the politicians here, who had already saddled the New Zealand people up with that economy and wealth destroying ETS.
Next week you will see NZ’s prime minister John Key address your parliament. Regardless of what he will say in parliament, his main address will most likely be held behind closed doors. Whatever is discussed there is more important for the proposed Carbon tax and the way it is going to be imposed than what is being made public.
Don’t be fooled with the public spin. Be very worried about what Gillard is doing behind all her smoke screens.
10
Probably a bit off topic but likely usable in the quest against a carbon tax :
Greenpeace is nothing more then a money laundering organization. Again and even more to be found out of only chasing the green of the greenback (dotted with the colors of other currencies) rather then the green of nature.
See:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/06/17/lorne-gunter-the-ipcc-loses-its-last-credibility/
10
True News @ 29 and others,
Much as I admire your passion, and that of Jo and the others organising rallies, and the people bringing Monckton here to talk, the reality is most of these events, in their current form, are at best, useless, and quite possibly counter-productive.
Let’s start from the top: What is the AIM of these exercises?
The usual answer is something waffly like “to raise people’s awareness”.
Which begs the follow-up question – how?
Enough negativity, here’s what needs to be done.
1 Don’t try and organise these things on a moment’s notice (as is happening).
If you want success you have to plan for success, and planning takes time.
2 If you want to “raise people’s awareness”, that means a whole lot more than “preaching to the converted” who actually came to the rally.
People need to be able to leave the rally armed with the ammunition of first, what they can do next, and second how to reach out to their neighbours and the rest of their community.
– Prepare a pamphlet that details, simply, in bullet form, why a carbon tax is not a good idea and how much it is going to cost, and what “benefits” it will mean to the environment. Employ large doses of the KISS principle.
– Have people moving through the crowd distributing these pamphlets. Encourage people who take them to photocopy and letter-box drop them in their neighbourhood.
– Have other people working the streets sticking these pamphlets, and a second one (see below), under the wipers of every car parked within a quarter-mile of the venue.
3 Have a booth set up somewhere prominent with a big banner that says “What YOU can do to help”.
Have information kits available for those who want to get active. Information kits to include:
– Copies of the pamphlet detailed above.
– An expanded information sheet with more information about the subjects covered in the above pamphlet.
– A DVD with copies of relevant (SHORT) videos by Monckton, Coleman and others, in a format that can be played directly on a DVD (that is, doesn’t need a computer to view). This should also include details of where viewers can get more information (websites, contact phone numbers and mailing addresses etc).
This DVD should not be free, but sold at a minimum charge to cover costs. Information should also be available so people can download the material instead. Either way, people should be encouraged to copy and distribute the material.
– A pamphlet detailing what people can do to further the cause (letterbox drop, share DVD, organise a neighbourhood bbq etc).
– Tell people, when they meet someone who is interested, to get them doing the same things. Make sure they know where to get information from.
4 Get someone with some graphics skills to knock up some suitable posters, and make them available online for people to print out and bring with them.
Have a ready supply of these professional posters and some banners available at the entrances to the venues. Hand them out to anybody who will take them. Most people would rather hold something professional-looking.
5 Ignore the media. Refuse all attempts (as organisers) to be interviewed about your aims etc. These people are NOT there to help you or further your cause. They are there ONLY to catch you out and make an idiot of you on national television. Remember, they are trained professionals at doing this. You are an enthusiastic amateur. They will eat you and spit out your bones.
6 DON’T waste people’s time getting them to “contact their local member”. Contacting politicians this way is a complete and utter waste of time and resources.
Unless it is done en mass, in such a way as to scare the bejesus out of them by sheer weight of numbers, it is totally ineffectual. I am working on a way to let people tell politicians how they feel in a way that WILL scare the bejesus out of them. More of that some other time.
7 Above all, understand people come to these events to find out what they can do. Make sure they leave that information or you will have wasted their time.
I am stuck at home, and have limited resources. However, as a professional writer I am prepared to offer what help I can, if someone like Jo will provide a bit of coordination so we are not duplicating each other’s efforts.
10
Sorry
10
memoryvault #43
It reminds me of a line (William Colby I think),
“those who fail to plan, plan to fail”
10
The reason why I attend political rallies is to send a clear signal to our elected politicians about my position on an issue. If I’m concerned enough about something to spend half my day waving a sign and chanting then, it’s no sweat to tick a box come election day.
As good as it is to hand out information, it should generally not be about the issue itself. People don’t wander to political rallies to ‘check it out’. Political rallies are a social networking opportunity for the goal of collective organisation. Those on the right need to learn a bit more about this area of political activism from the left. The left do it very well and their approach should be emulated.
As a member of a highly political family I can tell you, it’s mostly about media visuals, and a bit of mischief as well. Mischief being a bit of subversion. Rioting is the extreme example but, good subversion strategies have a theatrical element to them. Personally, I’m thinking of getting my hands on a polar bear outfit with some witty sign. My office is a block away from Hyde Park so I’ve got a great staging point for all Parliament House related activities. 😉
If anyone else would like to make use of my rally HQ please get in touch with my via Jo.
10
Barnaby eh? Well that’s just increased the green vote a few 1000. Good call.
Monckton is also a good call to increase the green vote. Just love those eccentric sceptics. Looks solid convincing stuff guys (not).
Get Jo up there showing a bit of leg – will work better.
10
Terence Kealey, a clinical biochemist and the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Buckingham, wrote an article in the [London] Times on Nov 15th 2004 under the title ‘Who says science is about facts? They only get in the way of a good theory’. In this he recollected as follows:
‘When Charles Moore was editing The Spectator he once asked me why, of his contributors, it was those trained in science who were the least honest…..Charles Moore had supposed that scientists would revere facts, but that supposition is a myth: scientists actually treat facts the way barristers treat hostile witnesses – with suspicion.
The myth maker was Karl Popper.Popper was not a scientist but a political philosopher who proposed that science works by ‘falsifiability’: scientists discover facts; they create a theory to explain them, and the theory is accepted until it is falsified by the discovery of incompatible facts that then inspire a new theory….Yet it is a myth that working scientists always respect falsifiability. Scientists often ignore incovenient findings’.
Climate Change scientists who propose that Earths atmosphere exists inside a greenhouse and is heated by carbon dioxide may as well try and convince me that the Earth is flat.
10
I prefer these type of posts john.
10
Rereke Whakaaro@3
I note your reference to the United Nations.
Too often unmentioned today is the fact that under Article 6 of the United States Constitution, a treaty becomes the “supreme law of the land….and judges in every State shall be bound thereby….anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary not withstanding.”
At one stroke, thereby, all State laws as well as the Constitution itself may be legally nullified by a treaty.
In the United States this has been done. The United Nations Charter, ratified by almost 100% of the senate, became as a treaty the Supreme Law of the Land, anything in the Constitution or the laws of any State to the contrary not withstanding.
It concerns me as to how Australia has ratified the UN Charter. In section 51, sub section 29, external affairs, Gareth Evans used a dubious High Court interpretation to overide Tasmanian State Laws. Perhaps the UN Charter is the Supreme Law of the Land in Australia.
10
O/T Protest on Power Costs?
New $1.2 million Solar/Gas power plant at Chinchilla producing 250 mega watts
http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/sun-dawns-on-power-plant-plan/story-fn6ck51p-1226077678982
How many square kilometers will the house of mirrors take up – and isn’t the QLD government still building a solar plant at Cloncurry? (still not operating?)
What’s the cost per KW on this plant compared to others (Coal, nulclear % gas etc)?
Sounds very expensive for 300 new jobs!
10
we need educating
check this out if you don’t have time to wait for the 13 million dollar ad campaign
Climate change is happening
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2761976.html
sad isn’t it
10
val, I just spotted that too. Seeing as I haven’t had a post make it past moderation in a few months I thought I’d post my response here before it gets lost in the bit bucket.
Here’s some tasty quotes from their website, Goebbels would be proud:
The hits just keep coming. Seriously, I could quote half the website, it’s that bad.
10
Kevin Moore: #50
Now that is a scary thought.
I am not a lawyer – and certainly not a constitutional lawyer – but as I understand it, that the UN Charter gives the Assembly of the United Nations the right to collectively sanction a member state by majority vote. The Security Council also has the right to respond to aggressive actions by one member state on another, with a majority vote of its member states, accepting that the permanent member countries have the right of veto. I do not believe that the Charter gives the United Nations Assembly jurisdiction over the laws of individual member countries.
On the other hand, the provisions encapsulated in treaties sponsored by the United Nations, are binding on the signatory countries for the duration of the treaty. If the country is not a signatory to a treaty, then it is not bound by its provisions. Of course, not agreeing with everybody else can impact trade agreements, et cetera, so individual countries are usually under some pressure to sign. This is one of the reasons why bi-lateral and multi-lateral free-trade areas are formed – they allow countries autonomy but still keep the trade windows open.
The United Nations, under its charter, can request funding from the member states for specific projects. This is the reason why millions (of other peoples money) has been spent on the massive propaganda exercise that is Climate Change. Here is how it works:
A UN Agency, acting quite in the open, will pay for a top flight PR company to point out the dangerous situations that would arise, should the world be getting increasingly warmer because of industrialisation.
This company will target wealthy families, individuals, corporations, trusts, and NGO’s, suggesting that they make charitable donations to one of a number of organisations that are working to “solve” the problem. These will include the usual suspects: Greenpeace, WWF, et cetera. They will also include organisations that specialise in “funding academic research”.
It is this latter group who provide grants for specific projects, conducted by specific academics, at specific academic institutions. The academic institutions themselves, have very few permanent staff (usually only the Research Programme Director), so everybody-else’s income is dependent on the grant funding, which is of course dependent on the results obtained. In this way, people are assured of getting what they pay for. The NGO’s also play their part in raising public awareness, by publishing “grey literature” that takes the scenarios to an extreme.
The results of the research are then made available to the United Nations (though the United Nations Environment Programme, and its child, the International Panel on Climate Change). The UN then release this research to the media, as being authoritative, which in turn raises public awareness. Shifts in public awareness are then reflected in opinion polls, which influence Government policy. Of course, the United Nations can also bring diplomatic pressure to bear on individual member states as well, so everybody starts singing from the same song-sheet.
Apart from the skeptics, of course.
It is worth noting, that this mechanism gives the United Nations, and member governments, the defence of plausible deniability should the wheels suddenly fall off the wagon (as it might well do, given the recent evidence). Nowhere has the United Nations, or individual governments, raised the scare level higher than asking for, and receiving, professional opinion (which is a reasonable and prudent thing to do, in the circumstances).
The level of hysteria has come from the populace itself, and especially from younger students who do not necessarily have much of a science background, but do know about fear of the unknown, when they feel it. The, “OMG it could be worse than we thought”, reaction.
Now, to answer your question, with a question. Why would the United Nations go to all of this trouble, and come at the solution they wanted by devious means, if they could just tell the member countries what to do?
Ergo, I suggest, the UN Charter does not override national constitutional arrangements.
10
val majkus: #52 Waffle: #53
Perhaps the “scientists” who will be contributing to this need to be asked to explain what is meant by “Peer Review”.
Or asked to explain the scientific method, as it applies to refuting previous widely held beliefs in Chemistry and Physics, and why that explanation does not apply in Climate Science.
And asked to explain the differences between Meteorology, Climatology, and Climate Science, and why there needs to be any distinction.
10
The zombies at Getup have come to life:
Getup have just taken a leaf from the Green party. They didn’t like what we the people were saying to them, so they’ve killed the vote:
What a typical Stalinist response to a democratic voice!
Hahaha. We win… AGAIN….
10
Howdy Waffle
One small point politicians are now waking up to is the political might of the Internet to circumnavigate their propaganda ! , debate and strong opinions can bring millions of like minded people together , true people power is not far away !, Warning to Tony Abbott DO NOT BE FOOLED WE WILL GIVE YOU THE SAME SCRUTINY .
As for the bent climate scientists , they had better learn to live in isolation forever once this giant scam is shown for what it is !. Anyone’s life ruined by there propaganda will have a long memory when considering accountability for their actions !!!! ,there will be nowhere to hide and no one to blame , remember you were warned !!
REMEMBER EVERY ONE… THE INTERNET IS THE NEW FRONTIER FOR POLITICAL CHANGE !!!
Now let’s keep the debate , the conversions and the rage alive and rocking ! let’s show these warmest riff raff now on the ropes ! What we can DO !
BELIEVE ME!!!! They are beginning to CRACK!!!
10
You guys still don’t get it ! It’s the sceptic look – it’s not cool. And you’re talking to yourselves.
Now you must admit you do look like a bunch of rightists maddies. Josephine here has one ranting rabid anti-AGW post after another.
At some point methinks you doth protest too much.
Want to win votes – change the pitch. Need more sophistication and good humour. Don’t look so rabid. (Now of course you’ll all be deeply offended by this but it’s true)
10
So right Raven @ 57
Outrigger just cracked!
10
@ 58 …. No we get it , what worries people like you and this pissant govt is what might happen a little further down the track . I can just see 5 million pissed of Aussies when they wake up to how wrong this is , burning mother f…..s like you at the stake , what worries dweebs like you is that you don’t have an argument , if I was in your shoes I’d put up or shut up !! Debate?…I didn’t think so….. Sleep well while you can !!!!!!!!!!!
10
@59 There going down every where Dave , the support starting to flood in from the US alone is incredible.
Even members of the US T Party are giving advice on how to deal with the situation we are now faced with .
They don’t like communist socialist UN agendas any more than honest hard working Australians do .
Every comment like ignoramus @58 sends me off to convert more from the dark side 😉 & I meet and talk to a lot of people !!!!
10
“MadJak” (40),
I also saw the pathetic comments by this “john Brookes” character on the GetUp website….
He should get out of his basement more !
10
“Outrider”,
You are a DECEIVER……
10
I’d be with you grumpy, let me know. I’m only about 100k from Wagga Wagga.
Happy for Jo to give you my email address if I can help.
REPLY (Done 🙂 ) Jo
10
Outrider@#58: As a website publisher, I have access to data you don’t and I can tell you this website is one of the most successful in Australia for traffic. That is because it is the most popular of the websites that represent around 70% of Australians who don’t accept the junk science they’re being fed on climate, which is being used by your economically illiterate political movement to attempt to foist an unsustainable penalty on the working people of this country and give a handful of zombies like you the warm fuzzy feeling of temporary political power. You’re about to be sent back to your minority ghetto.
10
Outrider: #58
We don’t get lots of things. Let me see if I can think of one … oh yes, jetting of to exotic locations for huge conferences where everybody sings from the same song sheet and no dissenting voices are allowed. No, we don’t get that … mind you we don’t much care, either.
Like, we don’t really care about being cool. Being cool, is just another way of being a conformist – anybody can do that – monkey see, monkey do – boring. Now original thought; that is way more difficult, especially when you are a product of the post modern education system, and have been programmed what to think. You don’t believe that the education system uses propaganda? Well, if you have been brainwashed, how could you tell?
And as for talking to ourselves, well yes, we are, but we are also talking to lots of other people, many of them seriously important people. And you know what? In private, they will admit that the climate change stuff is a crock of fertiliser (not the CO2 kind) and are looking for a way to extricate themselves with dignity. And you know what? Some of us are helping them find ways to do that – oh, such fun.
As for accusing us of being “rightists maddies”, well your biases are showing. We are not all from the right of the political spectrum. In fact several people who comment here grew up in behind the Iron Curtain. They have lived that life, and can see people like you wanting to take them back again. No way is that going to happen, comrade.
By using the name “Josephine” you demonstrate that you do not really understand what this site is about – whoever told you what to say has stuffed it up. Her name is Joanne, and we are her guests on her blog, which is a very useful place for us to compare notes and views. You may call it ranting and rabid, if those words are top of your brain, but they are not words we would use about Alarmists. We believe in courtesy – old fashioned I know, but there it is.
And as for protesting too much. Well yes you have got it right. We do protest about the lack of scientific rigour in Climate “Science”, the doctoring of raw data to make it fit the theory, the deliberate attempts to stop counter opinions from being published, the lack of any empirical evidence in support of the theory, the over-reliance on inadequate and incorrect computer modelling packages, and the way in which this “science” is bringing the whole profession into disrepute. And we are forced to protest a damn sight more than we would like, and that is too much.
“Want to win votes – change the pitch”. Sorry, we didn’t realise that we needed to win votes. Votes are about opinion and belief. We are more concerned with facts and science. There is nothing more sophisticated than that. Oh yes, and by the way, if you had spent some time on this site, and read some of the previous posts, you would have seen lots of humour. In particular, “Speedy” is a master (or mistress) of satire, and the good old fashioned Aussie send-up. Hang around, you might even feel a little humour yourself (but don’t tell your friends, they wouldn’t get it).
And finally, we are not deeply offended by your comments. What is there to be offended at? We have experienced worse than you could deliver, and come away laughing about it.
10
MaxL: #64
Why does that sound so weird?
10
Madjak @ #8
I’m sorry to say that the Get Up forum has now openly declared in opposition to your petition AGAINST the Carbon Tax. They’re clearly just another advocacy group garnering numbers to support their own agenda and sod all to do with ‘democracy in action’, as they put it.
The Votes count hasn’t increased since yesterday despite many supportive comments more recent than that, so a suspicion of ballot manipulation cannot be discounted.
There front page did strike me as having a similar ‘feel’ to the disingenuous 10:10 campaign’s page, with a ‘live’ feed of new members as they signed up an’ all.
Here is the full statement from them: (kudos to them at least for having the courage to clarify that)
They do need some education in public representation though, enthusiastic amateurs that they are.
10
Ah Rereke, only 100k from Wagga Wagga means, at least you’re not as far as the back of Bourke.
If you get a chance to come to Aus, come and visit us, you’d always be welcome. We are friendly like you guys from the long white cloud.
On your #66 debunking, Twenty thumbs up from me.
10
Rereke Whakaaro @67
Yeah we have some funny names on this side of the ditch too!
10
Rereke @ 66
Excellent post.
Pretty much says it all.
10
LOOK …….. LOOK.”… EVERYONE I’VE FOUND A COMMUNIST MANIFESTO !!!!!
admin
Kelsey Cooke
Hi all – thanks for getting involved. There’s a lot to respond to here, and I’ll do my best to do so below.
In regards to your donations queries, we’re an independent organisation funded largely by small donations from our members. If you have queries about our donation history, visit GetUp.org.au/about/disclosure.
GetUp won’t be running a campaign in opposition to a price on pollution. We’re representing our members interests in campaigning for environmental sustainability for Australia, and believe that a price on pollution is the most effective way to move towards a clean energy future. Given that, I’ve declined this suggestion. There are plenty of great resources about what a price on pollution can do for Australia, and we’re happy to share them – just shoot us an email to get in touch.
Just to clarify, this site isn’t designed to be a forum for your own campaigning – rather, it’s a space we use to gauge new ideas within our membership that GetUp might take interest in campaigning on. If you have feedback on our current campaigns, questions about this suggestion, or any further thoughts you’d like to share, the best way to do so is by sending through an email.
Thanks again.
[Report] about 6 hours ago
AND IT WAS HIDING JUST A FEW POSTS ABOVE 🙂 :):)
10
[…] Carbon Tax Protest Rallies Handy summary of the many upcoming protest rallies around Australia at JoNova. June 20th, 2011 […]
10
Jo has already done a fabulous exposee on that supposedly ‘ independent ‘ Get Up outfit, who received over A Million Dollars from the CFMEU Union last year. Wonder just who they are trying to Get Up.
10
Rereke Whakaaro @3,
The UN and those who drive it are indeed the real enemy. CAGW is a diversion, an excuse. Now, how do we fight them? I know of only one way…fight our individual governments. As the UN member states go, so goes the UN. Send them no money and they die on the vine. Individual nations will make or break the fight.
That said: good for you Australia. Protest hard and often. Never slack off. You can win the fight. This is a war for the very soul of humanity and needs to be treated as such.
Welcome to the world of the tea party!
10
Rereke @ 66
Couldn’t have said it better myself, even if I’d just consumed a soup of dictionary followed by a main if thesaurus. One of those, “I wish I could do that!” moments.
Thank you.
10
Jo, can you find the time to have a look at this article on Garnaut’s comparison of Norway’s energy policy and their CO2 output.
Garnaut has got it completely wrong.
http://theconversation.edu.au/australia-v-norway-does-garnauts-comparison-add-up-1724
h/t to Scarlet Pumpernickel on WUWT.
10
MaxL: #69
Right, well that certainly clears things up a bit.
10
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/in-favour-of-a-law-to-impose-carbon-tax/story-e6freuy9-1226078085686
Should there be a national plebiscite on whether to impose a carbon tax?
vote now!
10
Val @ 79
This is a very cunning move by Abbott and co.
10
Joe V @ 68
They have stopped allowing people to vote for it in a typlically stalinist move.
I guess having a real poll on the issue was just too threatening for their little tea cup.
Just to clarify – I can’t take credit for the idea – it was David who initiated this (Good idea there david, BTW).
RE: the referendum call by Abbot – go for it. A new means of taxing we the people should go to referendum anyway. I’m sure the stalinist getup front organisation would have difficulty stopping that poll!
10
[…] Up Coming Anti Carbon Tax Protests […]
10
Check out mat ridley’s article in today’s Australian.
10
Thanks there Madjak @ #81.
I didn’t realise that Jo was already onto them (Get Up) when posting originally, or that you had already rumbled their embargoing the suggestion Sunday. I really need to Keep Up. But yes it was a brilliant idea of David’s to tweak their tail by suggesting it.
10
Wouldn’t this inspired cartoon by Josh , at Bishop Hill
Wouldn’t it make a wonderful T-shirt motif, for all these upcoming Anti-Carbon Tax rallies, as well as at Lord Monckton’s tour Dates ?
10
@JoeV
For another cartoon by Josh – see TonyfromOz’s post here
10
heard this quote on radio this morning and thought the scientific community was finally standing up to CAGW “hysteria”!!!
Anna Maria Arabia, from the Federation of Australian Science and Technological Societies:
“Important areas that drive all sorts of decisions, how our agricultural practices are undertaken, medical treatments, it really is very important that some of the hysteria around the climate science is not harmful to research more broadlly,” she said.
http://australianetworknews.com/stories/201106/3247938.htm?desktop
so ALL “households” will receive money!
Senator Brown said the proposed plebiscite would be a waste of taxpayers’ money.
“If the question is put to the public do you want to have taxpayers funding the polluters at a cost of $720 per household by the end of the decade, or would you prefer the polluters to be funding households to tackle climate change,” he told ABC radio.
“The polls show that by two to one, people prefer the polluters to be paying.”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/plebiscite/story-fn59niix-1226078311776
what are the “various issues” the Coalition wants plebiscites for, Bob, or is that just more CAGW exaggeration?
This morning, Greens leader Bob Brown told Radio National his party would not be backing the plebiscite call, which he described as a “sideshow”, “tricky” and a “huge waste of taxpayer’s money”.
He said the result of any such poll would depend on the wording, and predicted Mr Abbott would lose if a plebiscite was held on his “direct action” plan.
“It’s a tricky political move but one that’s very expensive on the public purse,” Senator Brown told Radio National.
“What he’s saying here is I didn’t get government, so I want to sideline government while I go with taxpayer-funded plebiscites on various issues.”…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/20/3247842.htm
Union leaders should be dumped by their members, or the members should stop paying their exorbitant dues:
Mr Howes, who withdrew support for the then prime minister on national TV, said he would bet his house on Ms Gillard leading Labor into the next election.
“Look, Labor is doing it tough at the moment in the polls, but we’re having big fights,” the Australian Workers Union national secretary told the Australian Agenda program on Sky.
“We’re standing up for an issue that needs to be dealt with, and the introduction of carbon pricing is one of the most significant reforms that Australia’s economy will ever go through.
“… this is harder than introducing a GST, this is harder than trade liberalisation. This is about a fundamental shift in the economy, and it’s not going to be easy. Sticking to your guns and following through is the right approach to have.”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/union-boss-paul-howes-stays-solid-behind-julia-gillard-amid-labor-unease-over-kevin-rudd/story-fn59niix-1226077968242
CSIRO cherry-picking no doubt:
20 June: Australian: Brendan O’Keefe: Pollution put on the map by CSIRO
MEMBERS of the public will from today be able to track trends in greenhouse gas pollution with the launch of a CSIRO interactive website.
The website will show in real time how gases, some of which have grown in concentration by up to 20 per cent since the 1970s, fluctuate in the atmosphere.
But CSIRO Greenhouse Gas team leader Paul Fraser said the data was just that, rather than a pointer to climate-change research. “The site doesn’t get into the climate change science in the sense of ‘if CO2 goes to such level, what will the temperature do?’,” he said. “It’s (merely) a history of our measurements. People now can make up their own minds about the data.”
The website shows records taken of gases such as carbon dioxide and methane at Cape Grim, on Tasmania’s northwest tip, since 1976 to the present day…
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/pollution-put-on-the-map-by-csiro/story-fn59niix-1226078125903
meanwhile, brrrrrrrr….
20 June: ABC: Queensland shivers as mercury plummets
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/20/3247978.htm
10
are u listening CFMEU and the rest of the Union leaders?
19 June: TradingCharts: Call to boost carbon aid for industry
The Energy Users Association of Australia has released a new report it gained from forecaster Deloitte Access Economics on the impact of a carbon tax combined with renewable energy targets. It shows that by 2020, the price of electricity on the wholesale market may increase by 121%. That claim, and a prediction for up to 155,800 jobs to be lost, will put pressure on the Federal Government to promise compensation measures for certain high-emissions sectors. Much will hinge on whether a global emissions trading scheme is operational or not…
http://news.tradingcharts.com/futures/7/4/160367447.html
10
A stain on all scientists !
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/a_stain_on_all_scientists/
10
ninemsn currently running a poll going gangbusters!
“Should Australia vote on a Carbon Tax”
Currently YES 29,623
NO 4,846
http://ninemsn.com.au/?ocid=www
10
keithH: now it’s 31,000+ to 5,000+ in favour of a plebiscite.
how totally unexpected!!!
20 June: Yahoo: Scientists hit back amid fresh death threats
Ms Arabia, who is launching the ‘Respect the Science’ campaign at Parliament House today, told ABC News Breakfast she had received a fresh death threat only this morning.
“We know there have been some very serious death threats in the past, this is completely unacceptable,” she said.
“[I had] an email threatening my life. No scientist should ever have to have their life threatened simply for doing the work they need to do.”
Earlier this month, a number of the country’s top climate change scientists, including several at the Australian National University (ANU), were targeted by death threats and reported receiving abusive phone calls for months.
ANU was forced to move its scientists to a more secure location and introduced other security measures…
Chief scientist Ian Chubb, who provides advice to government ministers and the Prime Minister, says science results are rigorously tested.
“It is about ensuring that people understand that there is proper science, properly conducted, properly reviewed and properly debated,” he said.
“And the consequences of that debate may change the way we think or they may confirm what we think, but there’s a process that underpins everything we do.
“I think it’s too easy for people to pick one little bit of this or that and constantly ram it home, because there are a lot of people in the world who know that you don’t have to be bright, you just have to sow doubt.”
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/technology/9669904/scientists-hit-back-amid-fresh-death-threats/
ABC headline, “death threats” but the article mentions ONE. so CAGW, isn’t it?
20 June: ABC: Scientists hit back amid fresh death threats
Ms Arabia, who is launching the ‘Respect the Science’ campaign at Parliament House today, told ABC News Breakfast she had received a fresh death threat only this morning…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/20/3248032.htm
desperation has set in.
10
Why don’t they get it, those fresh faced, innocent, idealistic & exploitable youngsters. The ‘polluter pays’ mantra is nothing but a short & catchy , catch phrase. It’s they, and only they, the consumers who will pay, and are already paying in Europe, with soaring household energy bills in England (22%) and Steel jobs already disappearing to India.
If all the households affected were to be adequately compensated for the resultant hike in their bills as producers pass on their costs, as they undoubtedly will, what would be the point in raising all that Tax in the first place, if it were really all to be given back. No, the compensation us just a lie. The bulk of this money is intended for wealth transfer to the developing countries along with Australians’ jobs. That is the commitment to the UN that the Govt. has already signed up to.
When will they realise ?
10
Thanks Geoff & #85.
Yes I’d like to see that Power Station cartoon on the back of the same T-shirts as Josh’s inspired “Greenpeace In Our Time” image of Dr. Pachouri.
10
Yeeeeehaaaa the claws will be out in Canberra today !,
Tony Abbott takes a stand
Now it gets interesting .
Labour will not be able to run from the plebiscite .
The writing is on the wall and a major bun fight will now be under way .
Oh to be a fly on the PM, s wall today !!
10
ALP Damned if they do and damned if they don’t !
10
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/scientists-have-warned-parliament-that-climate-change-deniers-are-undermining-their-research/story-fn59niix-1226078278077
Not again!
The winge is coming from the “Federation of Australian Science and Technological Societies ”
I’ve never heard of it; has anybody else
It’s described in the article as a peak scientific body
10
Look, perhaps this is all the PM wants. An excuse for not having to go through with this detestable Tax. If she’s only doing it to keep the Greens on side.
Like the Neo-Conservatives in England had to offer a referendum on a new voting system to keep their minority partners in govt. the LibDdms on side. When put to the people, that turned out to be a political irrelevance , much to the relief of the majority party, who witnessed their partners then become a political irrelevance as a result.
Putting it to the people could spell the end of the Greens. Well we live in hope.
10
Joe V @ 96
‘Look, perhaps this is all the PM wants. An excuse for not having to go through with this detestable Tax. If she’s only doing it to keep the Greens on side.’
I’m afraid that’s wishful thinking Joe. The lying Gillard has her Socialist colours nailed very firmly to the mast on this one. If it doesn’t go through she has absolutely nothing left to paper over the giant cracks evident in this illegitimate mish-mash of a government.
Latest on ninemsn poll:
YES 39,507 to having a vote on the carbon tax
NO 6,691
10
Roy Hogue @ 75
Given Kevin Rudds drive to form an Asia Pacific Union on similar lines to the EU Union and his desire for a top job in the UN,it is my opinion that it would be UN Australian even treasonous to give such people as him who want to turn the world into a socialist collective controlled by an anti – Christian elite any support whatsoever.
10
To Ian Chump ….. I think it’s too easy for people to pick one little bit of this or that and constantly ram it home, because there are a lot of people in the world who know that you don’t have to be bright, you just have to sow doubt.”….
That’s right Ian you don’t have to be very bright to try and scam a nation ,
You need only be a corrupted hypocritical brown nose !!
10
running 89% in favour at present…
Poll: Should there be a national plebiscite on whether to impose a carbon tax?
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/in-favour-of-a-law-to-impose-carbon-tax/story-e6freuy9-1226078085686
10
https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=170268483034560
15 attendees. Too funny!
10
the Australian has no qualms about placing this headline in a group before the NZ piece below:
“SCIENTISTS: Climate change deniers blasted”
Shanahan knows full well no-one denies the climate changes, but hey, this is CAGW and it doesn’t matter how dishonest u are, does it Dennis?
20 June: Australian: New Zealand Prime Minister John Key has forecast an ‘Australasian’ carbon emissions trading system
EXCLUSIVE Dennis Shanahan, Political Editor
Mr Key also said that he expected the timetable for carbon pricing would slow down in New Zealand because the rest of the world was slowing down.
He also said it will be very difficult to continue to include agricultural emissions while not being able to show farmers ways they can reduce emissions…
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/new-zealand-prime-minister-john-key-has-forecast-an-australasian-carbon-emissions-trading-system/story-fn59niix-1226078342649
10
There has been no one world power since the Capitol of the Eastern Roman Empire,Constantinople,fell to the Turks in 1453,a thousand years after Rome fell to Attila the Hun,in 453.Now the machinery for a seventh anti-Christian world government has been set up by the Babylonian Pharisees in the form of the United Nations.
Christ in His Revelation to John,about 96 A.D..said:”There are seven kings:five are fallen,and one is in [power]and the other is not yet come….and goeth into pedition.”[Rev. 17:10] Five world kingdoms had then come and gone:Egypt,Assyria,Babylonia,Medo-Persia,Greece. Rome was then in power over the whole known world.Christ describes the coming world government as red,or scarlet coloured,as a behind the scenes or mystery power and calls it “Babylon The Great,the mother of harlots and abominations of the Earth….drunken with the blood of the saints,and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.” Its scope is likened to a beast with ten horns,which are ten kings that will reign very briefly – “one hour.” The harlot “reigneth over the kings of the Earth.” [Rev.17] For the complete control of trade and industry by her “merchants,” read Revelation 18:11.
And of the UN’s brief reign, Christ,after prophesying the fall of the Red,anti-Christ Babylonian world power run by rich men,says:
“And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone,and cast it into the sea saying,Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down,and shall be found no more at all…..thy merchants were the great men of the Earth: for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.”
You reap what you sow and harvest time can’t be too far away.
10
interesting. neither of the following murdoch home pages has any mention of the carbon tax plebiscite at the time i’m posting this:
Courier Mail
http://www.couriermail.com.au/
Gold Coast Bulletin
http://www.goldcoast.com.au/news.html
in fact, a number of other front pages today are more likely to have “plebiscite a stunt” near the top with any mention of the push for a plebiscite way down the page, or not there at all.
tell me the MSM isn’t in the CAGW scam, up to their necks.
10
Val Majkus @ 96
”
Interesting Val, if you go to FASTS website (www.fasts.org) and check out their Board of Directors and Executive Committee, and couple of interesting things turn up.
First, there are twenty positions occupied by nineteen people.
The same person is both Managing Director and Treasurer.
Of the nineteen people involved, seventeen are on the public payroll (CSIRO, universities, govt departments etc).
Of the remaining two there is young Ms Arabia, who put out the press release and actually works for FASTS as Chief Executive Officer.
So there is only one person associated with the organisation who is not an employee, and apparently not on the public payroll.
Which brings us to the second interesting thing. That one person is a Mr Claude Gauchat who is both Managing Director, and Treasurer, and he is listed as the Managing Director of Direct2 Pty Ltd.
Mr Claude Gauchat seems to be something of heavyweight. Here is the blurb on him from ChemCert Australia where he is a Director:
Now what makes it all so interesting is, apart from mentions like the one above on third party websites, neither Direct2 Pty Ltd nor Mr Claude Gauchat appear to exist.
Nothing for either of them that I can find on Google, White Pages or Yellow Pages. I wonder just who Direct2 do business with, and how potential clients reach them?
Fascinating.
10
Curiouser and curiouser.
Direct2 Pty Ltd doesn’t show on a company search at ASIC either.
10
From Wollongong:
IACT (Illawarra Against The Carbon Tax) is organizing a NO CARBON TAX RALLY on SATURDAY 6TH AUGUST at 10 AM commmencing at LOWDEN SQUARE WOLLONGONG.
All free thinkers, democrats, Libs, Nats , laborites, trade unionists, coal miners, steelworkers, small business people, managers, students, pensioners, unemployed – in fact everyone is most welcome to attend and join us in the fight against the tax and to take a stand for Wollongong and the Illawarra region’s survival. We would appreciate all the help you can give us to publicise the most important rally in Wollongong’s history.
Meanwhile the ALP are in open dispute here over the tax. Our completely useless local member Steve Jones is actually opposing any tax exemption for the steel industry!
http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/news/local/news/general/stephen-jones-given-steel-blasting-by-union/2199115.aspx
And he has been openly attacked by the AWU and assorted local ALP luminaries. The carbonistas are imploding here and are a political rabble. Not a Green to be heard or seen anywhere. Should we press the advantage? You betcha. Come and join us in a march and rally for democracy, ethical science and the livelihoods of thousands of honest, decent and hard working Australians. But not Mr Jones – he is the first on the dole queue when we finally get a vote.
10
memoryvault: #107
Nice piece of analysis.
To add to it:
I am told that Claude Gauchat is “well known” in the corridors of power in Canberra. He has a reputation as a professional lobbyist in addition to his business interests, which are primarily concerned with animal remedies. So he appears to be branching out, somewhat.
FASTS is an amalgam of professional societies primarily concerned with the medical and pharmaceutical sector. It was formed in 1985 in reaction to the science funding cuts in the 1984 Federal Budget. It’s reason for being is to lobby Government for increases in scientific funding. It claims to represent 60,000 working scientists and technologists (I wonder how many of them are card-carrying members).
Perhaps the funding taps are quietly being turn off?
Note on the code, to put it in perspective: “well known” is lower on the scale of things than “welcomed”.
10
“You reap what you sow and harvest time can’t be too far away.”
We are being manipulated and stolen off to such an extent, that even some previously ethical people might be thinking “bring it on.” But really we ought to be trying to avoid any sort of breakdown. I always hated the various eschatological-utopian movements and thought, and still think, in terms of peaceful evolution. But these bankers in the Northern Hemisphere seem so comfortable with their stealing-spree and their bonuses, that it does not appear that matters will be resolved without civil strife.
10
MV thanks for your analysis; I looked at that site but I have Norton antivirus and it warned that the site was unsafe
I’ve passed your comment onto a scientist I know and asked the question
If I hear anything I’ll let you guys know
Also Jo or David Evans might know
10
Have a vote folks:
http://ninemsn.com.au/
10
Cynic that I am, it is hard to see this FASTS display as anything more than kissing a rich sometimes benevolent maiden aunt on her death-bed.
It will be interesting to see how quickly the FASTS people change their public position in response to any change of policy by the government or change of leadership or even a change of government.
10
There are a number comments on Andrew Bolt’s site from scientists who have not heard of FASTS —they must have had a very low profile and have now suddenly decided to raise their head.
10
fax numbers of oakSHIT….
265842922
262778403
Send him a FAX using this free internet fax service…..
http://www.freepopfax.com/
10
“FASTS” kissing “ass”..
10
This really encapsulates the motivation for out of touch with reality AGW alarmism.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/left-activists-profits-of-doom/story-fn59niix-1226078101850
10
On Tony Abbott’s call for a plebiscite ( which seems to mean ask the plebs, btw.) From the Telegraph:
That is funny. Do Aussie. pollies talk like that all the time ?
Entertaining and even true as it may be though, it’s entirely beside the point. How can anyone believing in and benefiting from living in such a great democracy not agree to letting the people have their say on such a constitutional matter – because what else is a brand new tax?
Anyone who considers the “body politic” (indeed), shouldn’t be troubled by the people should be ashamed of themselves.
10
CSIRO has opened a new site giving up to date readings of Greenhouse gas samplings.
I accessed it through a Computer World site which has the Launch information, and left the following comment
.
http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/390701/
“What has happened to Anthropogenic Global Warming? I can only find ‘climate change’ mentioned here. Let’s start by having honesty!
Where did the CSIRO take their survey? It wasn’t in sceptic circles because I don’t know anyone there who is sceptical of climatechange. Climate has changed naturally, sometimes cyclically and often chaotically since time began, driven by unknown and little understood combinations of multiple local, universal and cosmic factors and forces.
This is why the most stupid question frequently asked is :- “do you believe in climate change”?. It is also the most stupid statement frequently made by our Prime Minister and her minions – ‘I believe in climate change’!
It is a fact of life and requires no belief.. On the other hand, belief and blind faith is what is needed to accept the computer-modelled UNIPCC hypothesis of runaway Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming allegedly caused by a few extra human-induced parts per million of the essential life-sustaining trace gas, CO2.
Whilst it is a small step in the right direction, CSIRO and their Science into Society Group leader, Peta Ashworth and the oddly titled Changing Atmosphere research group leader Dr.Paul Fraser are going to have to come up with something better than a few alarming-looking parts per million and parts per billion graphs which at best may show some correlation, but no proof of any causation in relation to climate and/or temperature trends.
The gullible will swallow anything, but the government along with government-grant sponsored bodies and individuals, the vested interest promotors of CAGW in the MSM and various other organisations have vastly underestimated the intelligence and the feelings of the majority of the general public on this subject!”
BTW, latest on ninemsn plebiscite poll
YES 82,704
NO 15,242
Total Votes 97,946
For a laugh, have a look at THE AGE poll
39% YES
61% NO
Total votes 1308
10
Re my post at 118.
This CSIRO warning from their new Cape Grim site:
If you use or download Content from this site, you acknowledge that such Content:
•may contain statements based on scientific research and comprises data collected by CSIRO and third parties;
•is not professional, scientific, medical, technical or expert advice and is subject to the usual uncertainties of advanced scientific and technical research;
(and I loved this last one) !!
•should not be relied upon as the basis for doing or failing to do something.
10
thanks for digging into FASTS-facts. it reeked of psyops from the moment i heard it on the radio this morning and misread it as a plea from sceptical scientists to save science from the CAGW doomsayers.
with the greenpeace psyops still making news, u’d think the MSM would be cautious about what they did or did not report, wouldn’t u?
no shame. the CAGW crowd are manifesting some psychotic tendencies.
10
mv here’s some info
http://www.zoominfo.com/company/Federation+of+Australian+Scientific+and+Technological+Societies-27511049
Industry: Membership Organizations , Organizations
Company Description: FASTS is an energetic representative of 60,000 working scientists and technologists, and promotes their views on a wide range of policy issues to Government, industry and the community. The Federation was formed in late 1985, as a reaction to the 1984 Federal Budget, which made substantial cuts to funding for science. Its formation followed Barry Jones’ infamous accusation that the S&T community was “wimpish” in its lobbying and did not provide him with sufficient muscle in his dealings with cabinet as Minister for Science. The societies which make up FASTS represent the professional interests of scientists and technologists in Australia. Members include organisations such as the Australian Neuroscience Society, Australian Society for Biophysics, the Royal Australian Chemical Institute, the Australian Council of Deans of Science and the Women in Science Enquiry Network. Our President is an ex officio member of the Prime Minister’s Science, Innovation and Engineering Council (PMSEIC), and this allows FASTS to contribute to discussions at the highest levels in policy-making in Australia. FASTS has three formal objectives: to encourage scientific dialogue between industry, government, and the S&T community; to promote public understanding of science; and to foster close relations between the societies
I’m not overly impressed
10
Must see for the eco-maniac science advisor for the Whitehouse!
“In this interview, Dr. Tarpley reviews the writings of John P. Holdren, the current White House science advisor. This interview conclusively exposes scientific elite’s true agenda, world-wide genocide and the formation of a global government to rule.”
And he’s the drive for Obama’s environmental policies!
Love or hate Infowars here it is http://www.infowars.com/the-elites-plan-for-global-extermination-exposed-by-dr-webster-tarpley/
10
The protests will only increase with this onslaught of abuse towards skeptics.
The CAGW crowd and the pollies and broomhandles hanging on are attacking the very people that originally voted for them. Labour are labeling their own supporters as stupid, skeptics, uninformed, etc etc and the “MOB” don’t like it. These people have super funds invested in power, mining, construction, manufacture etc – but the govt is listening to this CAGW crowd and if they continue down this line of abuse against it’s own – it will be the end – and it growing in every sector of the community especially labour.
I talk daily to construction workers, labourers, cleaners, Union officals, Work Place Health & saftey officers, Traffic controllers – they are all against this CO2 Tax.
The End is Near!
10
@theRealUniverse: #122
Tried the link but the infowars site is (or has been taken) Down.
10
Look for Claude Gauchat via his last position – Avcare
From which search I found this: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/011080544629490.html
Avcare ‘appears’ to be some ‘independent’ body that watches out for agriculture etc., turns out it is a Monsanto and Bayer production, a lobby group, and Claude Gauchat worked for them, executive director; working to introduce GM modified trials in OZ.
He’s probably still working for them..?
from:
http://pipl.com/directory/name/Gauchat/60
Also found: http://www.animalhealthalliance.org.au/default.asp?V_DOC_ID=1645
Fifth columnist?
These companies in the pharmaceutical connections have a habit of creating new identities I read somewhere. Could be a very tangled web to unravel.
Pretending to be a registered company is fraud isn’t it?
10
val majkus: #121
Thanks for the reference. That seems to corroborate the information at my #109. I think it comes down to, “they have got a mate who sits on a “council” that writes to the PM”. I am not impressed, either.
10
TrueNews – the infowars link works for me.
10
Re Claude Gauchathttp://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/national/national/general/deformities-spark-pesticide-fears/2163809.aspx?src=rss
For an example of conflict of interests.
Memoryvault – I found the pipl.com link from google… There’s a lot of stuff on Direct2 Pty Ltd Claude Gauchat which is what I put in to search.
Well actually, not a lot, only 2 pages.
I can post them if you like.
10
I have to ask.., is anyone else having problems with google search from OZ on Claude Gauchat?
10
Myrrh:
Thanks Myrrh – It is up again
10
Apropos: Claude Gauchat – from LinkedIn.
Company director and expert in reputation risk management
Sydney Area, Australia | Management Consulting
In his photo he looks to be around 40-45, but it could be an old photo. But the “expert in reputation risk management” translates to spin doctor, which is not a good fit with being a lobbyist.
The spinners prefer to work in the shadows (like the spooks) 😉
This reference is probably a false positive, so you can cross him off of any list you might be keeping.
10
Claude A. Gauchat has been published.
Title:
A Note on Podapolipoides Grassi Berlese (Acarina: Podapolipidae), a Parasite of Chortoicetes Terminifera Walker, The Australian Plague Locust. First published: Australian Joournal of Entomology, Volume 11, Issue 3, page 259, September 1972
Abstract:
Parasitism by Podapolipoides grassii on Chortoicetes terminifera, the Australian plague locust, interfered with culturing of locusts and heavy infestations of the mite were associated with a decrease in host vigour. The parasitic mite was widely distributed in high density field populations of locusts in south western New South Wales and northern Victoria during autumn 1971.
10
TonyfromOz has a fabulous and timely new post
Solar Power Australia
TonyfromOz | 06/20/2011 at 6:30 am | Tags: Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard, Carbon Dioxide Tax, Concentrating Solar Power, Pricing Carbon, Solar Power Generation | Categories: Australia, Climate Change, Fraud/Waste, Politics, Propaganda | URL: http://wp.me/pJrS-f5L
http://papundits.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/solar-power-australia/
10
As protests build up against the carbon tax, we have another peer reviewed study indicating its the sun, not Co2
http://www.njgonline.nl/publish/articles/000392/article.pdf
Dr. Cornelis de Jager is a renowned Netherlands solar physicist, past General Secretary of the International Astronomical Union, and author of several peer-reviewed studies examining the solar influence upon climate. In response to the recent press release of three US studies indicating the Sun is entering a period of exceptionally low activity, Dr. de Jager references his publications of 2010 and prior indicating that this Grand Solar Minimum will be similar to the Maunder Minimum which caused the Little Ice Age, and prediction that this “deep minimum” will last until approximately the year 2100.
“The new episode is a deep minimum. It will look similar to the Maunder Minimum, which lasted from 1620 to 1720…This new Grand Minimum will last until approximately 2100.”
But hey… what would this solar specialist know? Our dear PM, Julia Gillard, relies on far more highly qualified climate specialists… Ross ‘Economist’ Garnaut… Tim ‘Doom & Gloom’ Flannery… David ‘It’s Co2’ Karoly.
10
This is what it’s coming to , I can almost here the cries of GOTT MIT UNS ! echoing down the hallowed halls
from Andrews Blog , another communist scientist , with no ideas except censorship and ignorance ,,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
”The valuable and credible work of all scientists is under attack as a result of a noisy misinformation campaign by climate denialists….” the federation’s chief executive officer, Anna-Maria Arabia, said.
So who is this Arabia, so concerned about sceptics undermining the “national building work” and so eager to smear them as “climate denialists”, of all things?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it wasn’t bad enough already , the tripe this halfwit spews is enough to make one sick !
Who’s keeping that list , because it just keeps getting longer and longer .
How many more of these morally bankrupt simpletons have they got to wheel out ?
I’m so embarrassed for my country , it pains me to have to keep explaining to people outside Australia that most Aussies are quite intelligent and switched on .
Then they wheel this defective mental cripple out , what’s next a goddamn ape !,
Lets face it , I do realize that each morning when this moron goes to the loo and releases the” MONSTER of the Sewers” , she waves goodbye to any brain she has . Where on earth do they manufacture these pustules?!?!…….
I just want to scream in frustration !
….oh well must be medication time 🙂
….and whoever it was that Belittled Dr Lindzen today , gist of was out of touch a minority viewpoint something or other …. My memory fails me ..been a long day ,anyways .. I FART IN YOUR GENERAL DIRECTION !!!!!!
Your Mother was a hamster and your father stank of elderberries !
Now it’s medication time …. CHEERS ALL .
10
Claude Gauchat
Late 1970 to late 1980 – Research, sales with various companies (agriculture) and Monsanto – especially GM research. Involved with FAST early 1990’s but not active. Then big in SE Asia & Pakistan promo’s with Monsanto & GM crops.
Had big loss to NSW Govt, Organic Farm Group & Greenies (Avcare still) over Genetically modified crops through Monsanto etc. in early 2004. After this he became more involved with FAST and the gravy train to CAGW (whole new crew of people without memory or mind) which is now his platform to promote GM crops to save the world from high CO2 levels and CAGW etc. If you can’t beat them – join them! Monsanto’s and Avcare position is pro CO2 Tax.
Money, Money, Money.
10
CLAUDE GAUCHAT uses some misleading and dishonest reasoning in his arguments supporting genetically modified technology (CT, January 22, p22 ”No call for anti-GM campaign: let consumers choose”). He at first mentions that GM technology has been used in plant breeding to identify diseases in the production of vaccines and medicines. He then goes on to argue that, because such technology is safe and beneficial in those applications, it should be used for conventional crops, implying that such technology is the same in both cases. It is not. Nor are there proven safety and benefits of the technology for food production as mentioned in the article. …
Article only cached on some links – not in archive at Canberra Times.
He’s been in this game for a long time!
10
Spin doctor/lobbyist is two sides of same coin isn’t it?
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/claude-gauchat/5/987/237
Ah, seems there are different kinds of Pty – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_company
If ‘small’ only have to produce accounts if ordered by ASIC
10
thanks everyone for the research into this peak scientific body
and in case you missed it Andrew Bolt has a post today
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/a_stain_on_all_scientists/
Just the start:
The exaggeration and the suborning of scepticism to “the national building work” show exactly why this latest campaign is yet another warmist disgrace:
AUSTRALIA’S scientific community will launch a campaign tonight aimed at redressing what it says is the damage to science which is being caused by climate change denial.
At its annual gathering in Canberra today, the Federation of Australian Science and Technological Societies will tell politicians that the campaign being run against scientific evidence of man-made climate change ‘’is undermining the national building work of all scientists’’…
”The valuable and credible work of all scientists is under attack as a result of a noisy misinformation campaign by climate denialists….” the federation’s chief executive officer, Anna-Maria Arabia, said.
….
10
One more interesting link to Claude Gauchat: http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php/article/three-food-groups
I don’t see the article! But clicking on comments is a wealth of info about it.
Mentioned here (post 15) is that the CropLife group represents the interests of these big agrichemical firms including Monsanto for whom Gauchat worked directly until recently, on the other link I posted it says that Gauchat was awarded lifetime membership of CropLife in 2005, the same year he set up his direct2 company which is himself only.
10
The GM crop connection for Monsieur Gauchat via Monsanto et al makes one wonder if the current CO2 “crisis” is merely the preliminary bout for the main event, a global food crisis for which GM foods will be the supposed savior, only to have GM crops with suicide genes ostensibly for “patent protection” which can be on sold to the hapless serfdom at a premium, only to lead to mass starvation across the globe, all while turning a nice neat profit! Would make any budding utopian wet with anticipation!
10
“Carbon Cate buys beachfront property… in Vanuatu”
http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/2011/06/carbon-cate-buys-beachfront-property%E2%80%A6-in-vanuatu/
Looks like Cate’s property investment advisors have spotted the same buying opportunity. Isn’t Vanuatu that little island about to be submerged?
Pointman
10
The latest ninemsn poll figures are:
YES: 111,624
NO: 21,966
Total votes: 133,590
Looking at KeithH’s progressive tallies during the day @90, 98 and 119 the percentage YES has declined slightly from 85.95 to 85.52, 84.44 and now 83.56.
Seeing as this is just a vote on whether we should have a vote about the “Carbon” Tax, it is interesting to speculate on what the above numbers really mean.
Firstly, the nearly 22,000 NO votes indicate that about 15% of the population think the democratic process should not apply to the Carbon Tax. Possibly a small number voted NO for other reasons such as it being a waste of money or it being a futile event, considering the murmurings about the “inevitibility” of the tax, or simply misunderstood the question.
Secondly, a significant chunk of the YES votes would be from hard-core Labor voters (like I used to be) who think the democratic process should apply. Some of these would vote “yes” to a carbon tax in the plebiscite, if that’s the correct term, but firmly believe in giving Australians a right to vote on the issue.
Finally, there’s all those who are opposed to the Carbon Tax and will overwhelmingly defeat it and I expect that would be between 60-70%.
The cost of this “plebiscite” is peanuts compared to the damage the carbon tax would do and besides, it may be offset a bit by the $14 million saved on the Dept of Climate Change’s advertising campaign, unless that’s already a fait accompli. Still a further offset would be the abolition of the DCC itself.
10
Jo and my Aussie cousins, is this correct? Apparently Australian climate scientists are receiving death threats. Now this story smells like BS to me, so I thought I’d check with you lot first. Needless to say, the greens have astro-turfed the discussion (it seemed like the story was placed purely to give them an opportunity to do that).
10
oh…. my mistake. Someone has helpfully posted a link (it got lost in slashdot’s stupid new threading system), showing that this was indeed just a ploy, because there were 2 threats made 5 years ago.
10
Robinson – here is the source article: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/opinion/editorial/general/change-of-attitude-needed-as-debate-overheats/2194216.aspx
So I’d not heed the opinion of some bloggers who think threats to harm, including members of family, are above board.
10
Ian – you ignore that the 15% could just be of the opinion that we democratically elect a government and then they get to make decisions. Our democracy is not one in which we all get to vote directly on the passage of legislation.
10
Robinson its just more lies. As you can see if you get down to the details.
10
val majkus@134 –
Re TonyfromOz’s post – There is a new post by Terry Cardwell called The Truth about Power stations HERE
He shows actual and doctored pictures.
10
thanks Geoff – I’ll send that to Tony; I’m a fan of Terry Cardwell ever sine that letter of his in the Morning Bulletin Rockhampton on December 22, 2009. Here’s the letter:
I have sat by for (many) … years frustrated at the rubbish being put forth about carbon dioxide emissions, thermal coal-fired power stations, renewable energy and the ridiculous Emissions Trading Scheme. Frustration at the lies told (particularly during the election) about global pollution. Using power station cooling towers for an example. The condensation coming from those towers is as pure as that that comes out of any kettle.
Frustration about the so called incorrectly named man made ‘carbon emissions’ which of course is Carbon Dioxide emissions and what it is supposedly doing to our planet.
Frustration about the lies told about renewable energy and the deliberate distortion of renewable energy and its ability to replace fossil fuel energy generation. And frustration at the ridiculous carbon credit programme which is beyond comprehension.
And further frustration at some members of the public who have not got a clue about thermal Power Stations or Renewable Energy. Quoting ridiculous figures about something they clearly have little or no knowledge of.
First coal fired power stations do NOT send 60 to 70% of the energy up the chimney. The boilers of modern power station are 96% efficient and the exhaust heat is captured by the economisers and reheaters and heat the air and water before entering the boilers.
The very slight amount exiting the stack is moist as in condensation and CO2. There is virtually no fly ash because this is removed by the precipitators or bagging plant that are 99.98% efficient. The 4% lost is heat through boiler wall convection.
Coal fired Power Stations are highly efficient with very little heat loss and can generate massive amount of energy for our needs. They can generate power at efficiency of less than 10,000 b.t.u. per kilowatt and cost wise that is very low.
The percentage cost of mining and freight is very low. The total cost of fuel is 8% of total generation cost and does NOT constitute a major production cost.
As for being laughed out of the country, China is building multitudes of coal fired power stations because they are the most efficient for bulk power generation.
We have, like, the USA, coal fired power stations because we HAVE the raw materials and are VERY fortunate to have them. Believe me no one is laughing at Australia – exactly the reverse, they are very envious of our raw materials and independence.
The major percentage of power in Europe and U.K. is nuclear because they don’t have the coal supply for the future.
Yes it would be very nice to have clean, quiet, cheap energy in bulk supply. Everyone agrees that it would be ideal. You don’t have to be a genius to work that out. But there is only one problem—It doesn’t exist.
Yes – there are wind and solar generators being built all over the world but they only add a small amount to the overall power demand.
The maximum size wind generator is 3 Megawatts, which can rarely be attained on a continuous basis because it requires substantial forces of wind. And for the same reason only generate when there is sufficient wind to drive them. This of course depends where they are located but usually they only run for 45% -65% of the time, mostly well below maximum capacity. They cannot be relied for a ‘base load’ because they are too variable. And they certainly could not be used for load control.
The peak load demand for electricity in Australia is approximately 50,000 Megawatts and only small part of this comes from the Snowy Hydro Electric System (The ultimate power Generation) because it is only available when water is there from snow melt or rain. And yes they can pump it back but it cost to do that. (Long Story).
Tasmania is very fortunate in that they have mostly hydro electric generation because of their high amounts of snow and rainfall. They also have wind generators (located in the roaring forties) but that is only a small amount of total power generated.
Based on a average generating output of 1.5 megawatts (of unreliable power) you would require over 33,300 wind generators.
As for solar power generation much research has been done over the decades and there are two types. Solar thermal generation and Solar Electric generation but in each case they cannot generate large amounts of electricity.
Any clean, cheap energy is obviously welcomed but they would NEVER have the capability of replacing Thermal power generation. So get your heads out of the clouds, do some basic mathematics and look at the facts not going off with the fairies (or some would say the extreme greenies.)
We are all greenies in one form or another and care very much about our planet. The difference is most of us are realistic. Not in some idyllic utopia where everything can be made perfect by standing around holding a banner and being a general pain in the backside.
Here are some facts that will show how ridiculous this financial madness the government is following. Do the simple maths and see for yourselves.
According to the ‘believers’ the CO2 in air has risen from .034% to .038% in air over the last 50 years.
To put the percentage of Carbon Dioxide in air in a clearer perspective;
If you had a room 12 ft x 12 ft x 7 ft or 3.7 mtrs x 3.7 mtrs x 2.1 mtrs, the area carbon dioxide would occupy in that room would be ..25m x .25m x .17m or the size of a large packet of cereal.
Australia emits 1 percent of the world’s total carbon Dioxide and the government wants to reduce this by twenty percent or reduce emissions by .2 percent of the world’s total CO2 emissions.
What effect will this have on existing CO2 levels?
By their own figures they state the CO2 in air has risen from .034% to .038% in 50 years.
Assuming this is correct, the world CO2 has increased in 50 years by .004 percent.
Per year that is .004 divided by 50 = .00008 percent. (Getting confusing -but stay with me).
Of that because we only contribute 1% our emissions would cause CO2 to rise .00008 divided by 100 = .0000008 percent.
Of that 1%, we supposedly emit, the governments wants to reduce it by 20% which is 1/5th of .0000008 = .00000016 percent effect per year they would have on the world CO2 emissions based on their own figures.
That would equate to a area in the same room, as the size of a small pin.!!!
For that they have gone crazy with the ridiculous trading schemes, Solar and roofing installations, Clean coal technology. Renewable energy, etc, etc.
How ridiculous it that.
The cost to the general public and industry will be enormous. Cripple and even closing some smaller business.
T.L. Cardwell
To the Editor I thought I should clarify. I spent 25 years in the Electricity Commission of NSW working, commissioning and operating the various power units. My last was the 4 X 350 MW Munmorah Power Station near Newcastle. I would be pleased to supply you any information you may require.
1,204 Words.
10
Mirabella and Barnaby !!Wouldn’t be seen in their company! All credibility will be lost by thei appearance
10
MattB @148, if your scenario was correct there would be a lot more than 15% NO. That 15% are the Clive Hamilton “suspend democracy” supporters who know full well that any vote will cause the carbon tax to become a dead duck.
10
When a nation ratifies the UN Charter,article 110 of that Charter says that “the ratification shall be deposited with the government of the United States of America”.
As the US by treaty under article 6 of its Constitution adopted the UN Charter as “the supreme law of the land”,it has become the UN.
So if the the US neglects to sign a treaty on climate change,it is not because it rejects the idea,it is because there is no need to sign a treaty with itself.
10
Kevin Moore do you have links to support your claims?
10
Mark D @ 155
The only links I have are my copies of the US Constitution and the UN Charter and a bit of logic which is subject to scrutiny.
10
As a US citizen and a pretty decent scholar of Constitution I am skeptical that we would have abrogated our sovereignty to the UN without at least some news coverage.
That said, I am VERY concerned that the UN intends to do that eventually, but it won’t by by Article 6.
@50 you said:
Detailed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause
article 6 was written so as to say that the “supremacy” of the US constitution above and superseding any State laws or {state} constitution.
Read it this way article 6; “provides that state courts are bound by the supreme law; in case of conflict between federal and state law, the federal law must be applied. Even state constitutions are subordinate to federal law”.
10
Mark D @ 157
In full,Article 6 of the US Constitution says this:-
1. All debts contracted and engagements entered into before the adoption of this Constitution shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution as under the Confederation.
2.This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof and all treaties made or which shall be made,under the authority of the United States,shall be the supreme law of the land,and the judges in every State shall be bound therby,anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
3.The Senators and Representatives before mentioned,and the members of the several State Legislatures,and all executive and judicial officers,both of the United States,and of the several States,shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution;but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
The United States has ratified by treaty the United Nations Charter,so it seems quite plain to me that the Charter is the “supreme law of the land” in the United States.
10
Kevin, I don’t agree.
The constitution has not been (cannot be) superseded by a treaty. see: Concerns about treaties In the above Wiki link
That doesn’t mean someone won’t try but I firmly believe any such treaty argument would fail any test. The Founders were exceedingly careful to provide a balance of powers. Treaties are primarily the domain of the President. What you are suggesting would give the President too much power. Something that the Founders didn’t intend and would have abhorred.
10
Mark D @ 159
Wikipedia cites California v ARC America Corp and puts the -but- into the equation regarding your doubts about what I regard as plain english.
10
Mark D @ 159
The UN Charter has been ratified by treaty by the US. I don’t know the exact date but it would be around half a century ago.
10
160 Again I disagree. California v. ARC America Corp was Federal overruling of a state action. Not a treaty overruling the Constitution. The ruling was in the realm of corporate antitrust.
However, in the case of California v. ARC America Corp., 490 U.S. 93 (1989), the Supreme Court held that if Congress expressedly intended to act in an area, this would trigger the enforcement of the Supremacy Clause, and hence nullify the State action. The Supreme Court further found in Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council, 530 U.S. 363 (2000), that even when a State law is not in direct conflict with a Federal law, the State law could still be found unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause if the “state law is an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of Congress’s full purposes and objectives”.[4] Congress need not expressly assert any preemption over State laws either, because Congress may implicitly assume this preemption under the Constitution.[5]
California v. ARC America Corp
10
sorry forgot a link: http://supreme.justia.com/us/490/93/case.html
and the paragraph begining with “however” should have been in block quote
10
Good arguments here but Im sure Gillard and her cronies were “visited” by heavies from the UNIPCC and other criminals to implant this TAX on humanity so the globalist banksters can rule over the minions. Probably be overshadowed by the upcoming WW3 that will start when the US attacks Pakistan’s nuclear facilities and along with attacking Iran and Syria.
10
val najkus post 151
Thanks for your post putting Carbon Dioxide into perspective. Something like that would make an excellent flyer to distribute and get into general consciousness.
A while ago when I got irritated with the constant AGW ‘insulating blanket’ analogy and the seeming inability to take in that was practically all holes and no blanket. I worked out that as insultation around a body it would cover 1 square inch. And that’s all together, if really well-mixed as their claim, where’s the blanket?
10
I am in Wagga Wagga and would love to be a part of the Rally in ways I can, helping out at a stall or contacting people in my town such as my local MPs, Mayor, police. etc. We need an election now, and this is a great opportunity for Wagga to be involved in it. Please email me with NoCarbonTax in the subject line.
10
Carbontaxvote
Want to vote on the carbon tax – click here – http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NXRHQC8 – one question – Do you support the Government’s plan to introduce a price on carbon to deal with climate change?
Results are at facebook – Carbontaxvote – spread the word and let’s get this viral over the weekend.
10