Senator Malcolm Roberts Challenges Australian Government To Prove CO2 Is A Problem – Do You Accept It?
Essay by Eric Worrall
An inside look at being a climate cynical politician who is determined to seek answers from both his colleagues and government scientists.
… Our earth’s climate has changed in 4.5 billion years. Historical, experimental, scientific evidence shows nothing unusual or unprecedented about our current temperatures or weather events.
Climate science has been attacked. Special interest groups are driving ideological social change, profiteers want to profit from taxpayer subsidies, and politicians are looking for easy new ways to tax the public people, are usurping the governance and sovereignty of our nation. Alarmingly, once-regarded agencies, such as CSIRO and BOM, have allowed themselves to be part of the climate change industry and have failed to provide the government with scientific advice. strong, authoritative learning as a basis for policy.
There is no logical point, science with empirical evidence linking carbon dioxide from human activity to the cause of climate change. No organization or individual can prove that the natural climate change taking place is not completely natural.
This lack of robustly verified evidence has allowed governments to create policies that permanently damage our once cheap and reliable electricity system. Our manufacturing industries are disappearing abroad, families are struggling to pay their exorbitant electricity bills, farmers are under pressure and our once-reliable electricity system is suffering. difficult due to government regulations forcing wind and solar to be intermittently fed into the grid.
Even our children are not safe from this alarmingism, with environmental anxiety finding its way into the innocent world of our children.
The environment is also unsafe due to the lack of recycling of many solar, wind and battery components with relatively short lifespans and due to other inherently harmful aspects of solar and wind power.
I implore you to apply the utmost analytical and skepticism to the claims underpinning the relevant climate and energy policy. The impact of climate policy is historic and Australia has never before faced such a radical and arguably massive change to the way we live and our way of life.
Your closer scrutiny of the claims underpinning climate and related energy policy could be the difference between the millions of Australians who are suffering if the proposed legislation is passed or how Otherwise, there is a more prosperous country if existing climate and related energy laws are repealed. …
Senator Roberts’ document was submitted in August, but a link to the submission has just been provided to me.
This document is well worth reading if you are interested in delving into the wrongs of modern climate science and climate politics, from the perspective of a politician promoting clarity. Senator Roberts has a handle on many issues, including some little-known ones.
While the focus of the document is on Australia, much of it is applicable to everyone – climate alarmists around the world tend to use the same scientific perspectives to promote their case.
For example, Senator Roberts caught the curious problem of Marcot 2013 and paper partners, used by alarmists to promote the idea that the current rise in temperature is unprecedented. But Marcot’s paper is different from his PHD thesis. Difference? Marcot incorporated a hockey stick into his published paper.
One of the most compelling elements of Senator Roberts’ analysis was his interaction with the Australian government’s leading scientific body. In my opinion, CSIRO might be leaving a big exit for me for when today’s frenetic political climate collapses.
According to Senator Roberts, “… CSIRO admits that it has never stated that carbon dioxide from human activity poses a danger. Instead, dangerous statements come from politicians…”.
Historians will one day look back at today’s climate hysteria. They will struggle to understand how politicians and voters would mistake such a flimsy house for a building of solid evidence and sound policy – especially with politicians like Senate. Congressman Roberts is sounding the alarm.
Update (EW): Update again Article by Marcot 2013 et al, Marcot explained the addition of his own hockey stick. He admits “… The 20th-century portion of our ancient temperature stack is not statistically strong, cannot be considered representative of global temperature change, and is therefore not the basis for any conclusions. Which is ours. …”. His words.
Related
