AUSTRALIA’S top climate scientist has contradicted Federal Government claims the drought in the Murray Darling Basin is due to global warming.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change lead author, Prof Neville Nicholls, said the claim was not backed by science.

“The current dry period (in the Murray Darling Basin) might still be just a fluke, or natural variability,” Prof Nicholls said.

“We cannot confidently attribute it to global warming.”

Yet Federal Climate Change and Water Minister Penny Wong has repeatedly claimed the basin’s drought is due to climate change.

“Research shows that this severe, extended drought is clearly linked with global warming,” Senator Wong said in November last year.

“There is nowhere that this challenge is more serious than the Murray Darling Basin.”

But while rainfall has dropped to record lows, other scientists say the statistics don’t back Senator Wong’s claim.

Prof Steven Sherwood, of the University of NSW Climate Change Research Centre, said the “sceptics here are (for once) technically correct, in that there is no proven link – yet – between Murray Darling drought and climate change”.

It could now be said that “One Wong do not make a Right”

Now, we’re used to politicians lying through their teeth to get what they want, but this one really takes the cake because in this instance, we knew the truth BEFORE the statements were made – whereas usually we find the truth out down the path aways when it’s too damn late to do anything about it!

Like many here I have sent thousands of emails – given that each one I write goes to EVERY Representative and Senator. Rather than one long one, I send a short one EVERY DAY about a singular topic and when I can’t think any more – it gets that way sometimes – I start at the beginning again.

I will not stop until the crunch comes, one way or another – and if Abbot insists on taking us down the same path, when it comes to the election I will vote INDEPENDANT!!

The biggest fear of voting in the INDEPENDENTS has always been that they won’t have the expertise of the major parties and the world won’t consider us ‘stable’ for a while. I ask you, what’s the difference and which would you prefer, P platers at the wheel for a while or the CPRS/ETS AND GLOBAL GOVERNMENT!?

I want an Australian Government for the Australian People without any interference from party politics, international governments and/or affiliations, international corporations or world wide non-governmental organisations pulling strings.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Lets give the less powerful a chance.

I have a list of all ( in respective parties) members sitting on butts in Canberra and in my home State of Tasmania. I do group mailings too, plus the major newspapers and the local ones too.

Wish there were more ‘ordinary’ folk like myself getting their voices heard in the media… wish the media were listening. I read, I learn I write and Blog…….. I appreciate learning from more ‘advanced with knowledge’ people like on this and other blogs/lists…. The majority of folks I talk with don’t seem to have any faith in either political party right now…… they are a bunch of egotistical liars! Promise you the moon cause it is election time…… not worth much really tho…… all talk and no action…… Just want folks to see these liars and crooks for what they are – and at the same time save us all (what a big hope) from this crooked AGW agenda!

Cheer’s

An Open Letter to:
The Hon Tony Abbott MP
Leader of the Opposition
Parliament House, Canberra
Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.au
And
The Hon Greg Hunt MP
Shadow Minister for Climate Action,
Environment and Heritage
Email: Greg.Hunt.MP@aph.gov.au

Dear Sirs,

Re: Climate Change and your proposals for Australia in this regard.

It is our understanding that when discussing Climate Change, people are actually referring to the Theory of Man Made Climate change due to the (so called) excessive emissions of Carbon Dioxide released into the atmosphere, supposedly causing the temperature of the planet to warm, thereby endangering all life on Earth. If our understanding is incorrect, then there really is no point in continuing this letter. Assuming that our understanding is correct, we continue:

It seems that the Liberal Party is going to continue down the same, well worn but rocky road as that of the Labor Party, and push onto Australians the necessity to curb carbon emissions, to fall in line with other World Government proposals. Be it a 5% cut or a 25% cut, one must ask why? This letter is not discussing the Liberal Party’s Direct Action Plan versus the Labor Party’s Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme. Merely the fact that either Party (Once in power) will impose Carbon Cut’s in some way or another, because of so called (unproven) Man Made Climate Change

It has not been shown to be factual that human kind has caused or is causing any rise in global temperatures. Day after day, further information is coming to light proving that figures and data, used to infer the ‘theory’ of AGW (Man Made Global warming) is doubtful at best and falsified at worst. The latest scandal involves the selective cherry picking of temperature data and placement of weather stations around the world. We refer you to the Washington Times Editorial: More Errors in Temperature Data. http://washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/18/more-errors-in-temperature-data/?feat=home_editorials

What we would like you to explain to us is why the Liberal Party feels it is necessary to traverse the same path, by a different name, and enforce carbon cuts on the Australian Nation should it become the winner in the next Federal Election which is looming?

Surely it is better to get all the scientific facts, up on the table, and before the public view, so that the electorate can see for themselves why their Elected Representatives are leading them down an unnecessary path to Carbon Cutting measures.

Should however, the science be shown to be correct – in that we humans are responsible for Climate Change, we feel certain you will have much support for your plan as opposed to that of Kevin Rudd’s. Right now though there is no proof nor consensus, and many like ourselves are left wondering why we should vote for you, when your will only attempt the same thing under a different name.

Far too much is being done and dealt, behind closed doors. We have not seen you Mr. Abbott or your Minister Mr. Hunt, dealing with the scandals which are almost weekly emerging in the area of Climate Science. Yes we hear you debating the dangers of insulation and solar power installations; they are very topical issues, as are health and education. We would dearly like to see you debating the issues of fabricated or incorrect warming data and the possibility there being no need to deal with carbon emissions at all.

So this still leaves us questioning the semantics of Climate Change. Is it real? Is it happening? Are we humans causing the temperature to rise because of our increase in Carbon Dioxide Emissions? Is there any proof this is so? Professor Bob Carter has a couple of excellent short video’s showing just how the CO2 question, relating to Man Made Global Warming (Climate Change) does not stack up. We think it is worth you while viewing them. (part one), (part two)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFHZOYtAztU

You cause us great sadness in that you are merely traversing the same path as Mr. Rudd, and his path looks like it will lead to him gaining employment at the UN when his term as Prime Minister of Australia is over. We had dreamed of better things of him too.

We had hoped and prayed for a new leadership, taking us in a new direction, it seems we need to pray harder.

Sincerely, C & K (name and address withheld for privacy reasons)

http://www.fabian.org.au/1025.asp

Reports a conference with most of the attendees quite familiar to all of us. One just needs to focus the search. The crucial link it to the US and the http://www.keynesatharvard.org site summarises that quite well.

That was one link I found, I think – but my list also had Greg Combet and Faulkner on it on it as well. Perhaps a combination of name and Fabian might be successful.