Essay by Eric Worrall
An inside view into what it is like being a climate skeptic politician who is determined to get answers out of both his colleagues and government scientists.
… Our earth’s climate has been changing for 4.5 billion years. Historical, empirical, scientific evidence shows there is nothing unusual or unprecedented about our current temperatures or weather events.
Climate science has been hijacked. Special interest groups pushing ideological societal change, rent- seekers wanting to profit from taxpayer subsidies and politicians looking for easy new ways to tax citizens, are hijacking our nation’s governance and sovereignty. Alarmingly, once highly regarded agencies such as the CSIRO and BOM, have allowed themselves to become a part of the climate change industry and have failed to provide government with robust, competent science advice upon which to base policy.
There is no logical, scientific point with empirical evidence linking carbon dioxide from human activity as the cause of climate variability. No entity or person has ever proven that the ongoing natural climate variability is not entirely natural.
This lack of vigorously tested evidence has allowed governments to create policy that is permanently damaging our once cheap and reliable electricity system. Our manufacturing industries are disappearing overseas, families are struggling to pay their exorbitant power bills, farmers are under pressure and our once reliable electricity system is on its knees, due to government regulations forcing intermittent wind and solar into the electricity grid.
Even our children are not safe from this alarmism, with eco-anxiety finding its way into the innocent world of our children.
Nor is the environment safe, due to the lack of recycling of many solar, wind and battery components with relatively short working lives, and due to other inherently damaging aspects of solar and wind.
I implore you to apply the utmost of analytical and sceptical scrutiny to the claims underpinning climate and related energy policy. The effects of climate policy are historic, and Australia has never before faced such a fundamental and arguably monumental change to our way of life and lifestyle.
Your extra scrutiny on the claims underpinning climate and related energy policy could be the difference between millions of Australians suffering if the proposed legislation is passed or alternatively, having a more prosperous nation if existing climate and related energy legislation is rescinded. …Read more:
Senator Roberts’ document was submitted in August, but a link to the submission has just become available to me.
The document is well worth a read if you are interested in a very complete dive into what is wrong with modern climate science and climate politics, from the perspective of a politician who is pushing for clarity. Senator Roberts has captured a wide range of issues, including some obscure issues which are not widely known.
Although the focus of the document is Australia, much of the document is applicable to everyone – climate alarmists worldwide all tend to use the same scientific talking points to push their case.
For example, Senator Roberts caught the curious issue of the Marcott 2013 et al paper, which is used by alarmists to push the idea that the current temperature rise is unprecedented. But Marcott’s paper differs from his PHD thesis. The difference? Marcott grafted a hockey stick onto his published paper.
One of the most intriguing elements of Senator Roberts’ analysis is his interaction with Australia’s premier government science body. The CSIRO, in my opinion may be leaving themselves a large escape hatch for when today’s political climate hysteria collapses.
According to Senator Roberts, “… CSIRO admitted that it has never stated that carbon dioxide from human activity poses a danger. Instead, statements of danger came from politicians …”.
One day historians will look back on today’s climate hysteria. They will struggle to understand how politicians and voters ever mistook such a flimsy house of cards as a solid edifice of evidence and sound policy – especially with politicians like Senator Roberts sounding the alarm.
Update (EW): Re the Marcott 2013 et al paper, Marcott himself dissed his own hockey stick addition. He admitted the “… 20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions. …”. His words.
via Watts Up With That?