Global Warming/Climate Change

As the European carbon market collapses and European Governments come under increasing pressure on energy policy, the following communication to a senior Shadow Minister is concise, crystal clear and timely.

"I agree with the Opposition's policy to rescind the carbon tax and abolish the Climate Commission, but not with the rest of its climate change policy. 

The key issue at stake  is what influence if any does human activity have on climate change.

You and others unquestionably believe that human-induced greenhouse gases have a significant impact on global warming -- the process known as anthropogenic global warming (AGW). However, AGW is hypothetical, as  scientists  have not been able to table scientific evidence to prove that anthropogenic greenhouse gases are a significant driver of global warming.

Scientists have developed computer models with which to make  alarmist projections that have received wide media coverage. These models are invalid, as they do not adequately  represent  the interaction of the factors that influence  the climate change process. In fact, these factors still are not properly identified, let alone understood. Contrary to climate model projections, there has not been any statistically significant global warming since 1998, despite anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions continuing to increase.

There are no scientific papers that report the measure of global warming that has been contributed by human activity. This is clear indication that the contribution, if any,  is miniscule, and that the AGW-believing climate scientists have grossly over-estimated the influence of anthropogenic  greenhouse gases on global warming.

Despite this,  the AGW believers claim that there is scientific consensus  and assert  that climate science is settled -- whereas in fact it is not.

Scientific consensus is not evidence;  the opinions of the IPCC, the CSIRO, science academies, and environmental activists are not evidence;  and climate models are not evidence.

As renewable energy generation by wind turbine and solar is at least twice as costly as coal-generated power, there is no economic justification for subsidising renewable energy development.

AT THE VERY MINIMUM, IT IS CONSIDERED THAT NO MONEY SHOULD BE WASTED ON THE COALITION'S PROPOSOSED  DIRECT ACTION PLAN, AND  THE RENEWABLE ENERGY TARGET SHOULD BE RESCINDED. BOTH MEASURES ARE BASED ON POPULISM, AND CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED ON SCIENTIFIC OR ECONOMIC GROUNDS.