Why the ETS is not necessary

1. Why the ETS is not necessary Natural Climate Change What is the Truth?

2. What this debate is NOTabout It is not about Renewable energy – We agree we should work towards cost effective renewable energy. It is not about Pollution reduction – We agree we should work towards minimising toxic and life threatening pollutants in the environment. It is not about saving the Planet – We agree we should give the planet much consideration.

3. There is only one point we really want to discuss Is CO2 going to over heat the planet? First a few questions Has anyone ever known or found out information that the public is generally ignorant on?

4. I want to demonstrate how badly educated we are about CO2 I have 5 questions - please raise your hands to vote What colour is CO2? A: Green B: Transparent C: Black D: White E: Don`t know

5. In rough figures - how much CO2 is in the air ? A: 53% B: 13% C: 3% D: 1/30th of 1 % E: Don`t know

6. Of the CO2 in the air – How much is man made? A: 50% or more B: 25% C: 10% D: 5% or less E: Don`t Know

7. How much of the world`s CO2 is produced by Australia? A: 25% or more B: 10% C: 5% D: 1.5% or less E: Don`t Know

8. How much of Australia`s man made CO2 will an ETS reduce by 2010? A: 25% B: 10% C: 5% D: 1.5% or less E: Don`t Know

9. Greenhouse gases are 1% of the Atmosphere. And they are • Water Vapour 95% • Carbon Dioxide 3.6 % • Methane & others 1.5% • Only 3.4% of the CO2 is human caused 1% of gases in Atmosphere are Greenhouse gases CO2 is 1/27th of 1% of air

10. 1.5 % is caused by Australians (green area) ETS will reduce Australia`s CO2 by 5% (orange area) An equivalent analogy would be to reduce a piece of string 100 kilometres long by one millimetre. Now zooming in on that small red section of Human caused CO2 emissions

11. Or to reduce a piece of string the length of the circumference of the earth (40,000 kms) by 40 cm

12. And to put that amount of CO2 emissions into context Each year China increases its CO2 emissions by three times Australia`s total amount So in ten years we can add at least 30 more of these while in the same 10 year period Australia reduces its emissions by the orange amount

13. What are CO2`s properties? CO2 is odourless, colourless and non toxic We all drink it in soft drinks and beer We exhale it from our lungs It is necessary for life (Photosynthesis) Plant fibre & sugars

14. So CO2 is essential Plant Food? And here is what happens with more CO2 385 ppm 535 ppm 685 ppm 835 ppm

15. So as research shows – when extra CO2 goes into the air, extra plant growth occurs Higher Plant Growth per Extra CO2 7X todays level

16. Now to economics How much will it cost you and me to reduce man made CO2 by 5% • In a Leaked report, Frontier Modelling says it will cost Australia • $50 Billion per year for 40 years • That’s $4,550 per taxpayer per year for an amount that everyone agrees will do nothing for the planet • Now for some science

17. Everyone agrees CO2 is a greenhouse gas and inside a laboratory when CO2 rises from 300 ppm to 600ppm a temp increase of 1 degree C would occur

18. The question is “In the real world will there be positive feedbacks (more heating) or negative feedbacks” (cooling) The Theory of Runaway Global Warming

19. This graph shows the earth`s temp over the last 5,000 years Since temperatures were higher in past warm ages (green strips) and there was no runaway warming then, The idea of runaway warming today is illogical.

20. So lets check Al Gore`s facts that he says supports urgent action

21. Al Gore says the Science is settled and 2,500 IPCC scientists agree CO2 causes climate change. Are his claims true? Not exactly – Of the 2,500 Scientists (who have submitted papers to the IPCC), only 600 looked at the science involving CO2. Of that 600, only 308 were a part of the second review process.

22. Of that 308, only 62 reviewed the last chapter which looked at what to attribute the cause of Climate change to. Of that 62 only 7 reviewers were independent; and Of the 7, 2 did not agree with the final statement

23. So the statement saying “climate change might be attributed to CO2” was supported by the opinion of just 5 independent scientists Compare that to the 31,000 independent US scientists who have signed a petition saying there is no conclusive evidence CO2 causes climate change. See www.petitionproject.org 5 independent scientists saying CO2 could be the cause 31,000 Scientists saying CO2 does not cause climate change

24. And just to show you faces of some of the worlds top climate scientists Richard Lindzen Vincent Gray Ross McKitrick John Christy Miklos Zagoni Al Gore would claim these blokes support the IPCC`s position because they are all in the 2,500, but they don`t. In fact they openly oppose the IPCCs methods and exaggerated claims. * These are just some of the worlds best scientists whose evidence and arguments have been ignored and over ridden by the IPCC process. Bill Kininmonth

25. What is the Earth’s normal temperature? Historical Evidence – The last 1,000 yrs

26. Conclusion : Climate change is natural, and warmer periods occur without human CO2 emissions being the cause.

27. Does fossil fuel use correspond to Global Temp? From 1870 to 1915, fossil fuel use was fairly flat & temp went down From 1915 to 1940, Fossil fuel use was flat, & temp went up From 1940 to 1975, Fossil fuel use went up, & temp went down From 1975 to 1998, Fossil fuel use went up, & temp went up The first 3 of those periods contradict the idea CO2 emissions makes the climate warmer

28. Evidence of Ocean Temperatures The recent trend is a cooling, the opposite to what is predicted.

29. Evidence of Sea Levels While Sea levels were rising slowly since 1850, They have remained stationary since 2006, again against the predictions.

30. What is the IPCC`s predicted temperatures What the IPCC Models Predicted

31. What has been the real Temperatures

32. And looking at the IPCC Predictions on a bigger scale

33. Are there scientists with conclusive research on the greenhouse effect? In 2007 Dr Ferenc Miskolczi published a peer reviewed paper and it has not been refuted. He has shown the greenhouse effect is saturated and extra CO2 will not effect the Earths temperature.

34. He collected and analysed 1700 atmospheric radiosonde measurements and discovered the greenhouse effect is related to the amount of upward surface heat In other words Whatever heat Leaves the surface of the earth Two thirds goes into space And one third heats the atmosphere (the greenhouse effect) g = 0.333 The calculations from Miskolczi includes showing that for 60 years the greenhouse effect has not changed (despite a lot more CO2 being put into the atmosphere) Earth`s surface

35. The figure of 0.33 for g (the Greenhouse effect) is backed up by Jeffrey Kiehl and Victor Ramanathan in their book Jeffrey Kiehl Victor Ramanathan Jeffrey Kiehl is an IPCC scientist

38. IPCC scientist Richard Lindzen looked at the earth`s (LW) and the atmosphere`s (SW) radiation levels from satellite data to see if the Greenhouse effect has increased over the last 25 years ERBE Satellite Professor Richard Lindzen (IPCC) He found the two different radiation levels proportional therefore the evidence shows the Greenhouse effect is NOT increasing as CO2 levels rise.

39. And there are another 4 scientists with peer reviewed papers showing CO2 does not cause global warming. (i.e. there are no positive feedbacks) But just to be fair, on the next page is the list of all the Scientists who have found the opposite results to Miskolczi and Lindzen. Their research agrees with Al Gore

41. Now for some of the Fraudulent IPCC Science IPCC Scientist Michael Mann tried to get rid of the Medievel warm period. He produced a graph called the Hockey stick. It was used by the IPCC many times. Later independent scientist Stephen McIntyre checked the data and found the graph was wrong. Mann`s graph has been proven fraudulent. Michael Mann Stephen McIntyre

42. IPCC scientist Keith Briffa produced this graph.It shows temperatures but when published the red data was deleted and warmer temperature data added to “hide the decline” of temperatures since 1961 “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trickof adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”– Phil Jones Proxy temperatures sourced from tree rings

43. NZ Climate records were “fudged” (Checked by the NZ climate science coalition) The Original (Raw) Temp data The “manipulated” data This graph looks flat But this one has a big temp rise

44. Darwin`s Doctored Temperatures This is Darwin`s (NT) raw Temp records without adjustments

45. Darwin`s Doctored Temperatures Obviously several (fraudulent) adjustments were made to make a cooling (blue) turn into a warming (red) The IPCC graph shows a distinct warming

46. So make sense of all this there are just 5 questions I think we should ask ourselves Is Global Warming happening?

47. The answer is Yes - the global temperature rose from 1860 until 1998

48. But No the global temperature has not increased from 1998till now Flat Temp Trend

49. 2) Is Global Warming caused by rising CO2 levels ? As I previously showed you the first three periods of the records since 1870 contradict the theory as well as the period since 1998

50. Miskolczi and Lindzen have shown the greenhouse effect has not increased in the last 25 – 60 years Their work destroys the Manmade Global warming theory Dr Ferenc Miskolczi Prof Richard Lindzen * There are numerous other evidences that also point to CO2 not causing dangerous global warming, but for brevity we have not included them.