The elitists at Davos love to chat about restricting travel while comparing the private jets they flew in on. They push EVs, yet the Davos limos are fuel powered. The forum sessions openly plot to reduce animal farming and fishing, yet they dine on the finest steak and seafood.
Where do we draw the line?
Over coffee, these Davos speakers discussed guilt-tripping the masses about coffee’s CO2 emissions.
Would you let the WEF take away your coffee? It’s all part of the plan to make you feel guilty for existing and change purchases to products owned by the WEF-connected billionaires.
Reject the CO2 Climate scam. One Nation is hugely pro-human and anti-WEF.
If you want to get there cheaper and faster, it’s looking like petrol or diesel is just as good or better for a road trip. I’ll be keeping my diesel 4WD.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/Q5laFgSAr_Q/hqdefault.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2024-01-24 13:29:522024-01-24 13:29:57Electric Vehicles Not Good for Road Trips
These wind turbines will only make corporations wealthy, cost taxpayers and electricity users a lot of money, endanger wildlife, drive up energy prices even higher than they are now and will then require massive graveyards after they fail to produce the elitist pipe dream of “clean, sustainable energy”.
Laws require coal mines to rehabilitate the land after mining activities have ceased, yet there is no such legislation in place for wind and solar panel projects.
Irresponsible and dishonest politicians are literally killing the environment for no gain. And it will be the next generations that will be paying for it.
00Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2024-01-02 08:03:152024-01-02 08:03:18Preview to the Documentary – The Transition to Extinction
In 2020 the world conducted one of the largest global experiments ever seen.
Countries across the globe completely shut down their economies, locked everyone in their houses and stopped industrial production on a scale never seen before (and we hope to never seen again).
This unprecedented reduction in human activity and the burning of hydrocarbons should have been a climate activist’s dream – none of that pesky carbon dioxide being put into the air!
Yet through one of the largest industrial shutdowns the world has ever seen, the level of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the air kept going up. It didn’t even deviate at all.
The question has to be asked, if the response to COVID – shutting down almost everything – didn’t even make a dent in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, what will?
The answer is that nothing the net-zero climate lunatics tell us to do will make a difference. Human production will not affect the level of CO2 in the air over and above natural variation.
Anyone trying to tell you differently is selling a scam.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/GBEjLR7XoAAPfEJ.jpg?fit=1039%2C753&ssl=17531039Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2023-12-18 15:07:032023-12-18 15:07:07Natural Carbon Dioxide Experiment Proves the Real Inconvenient Truth
Watch out for climate change scam artists claiming every bushfire is because of climate change.
As this summer shapes up to be dangerous (just like every other bushfire season for decades has been dangerous) the real threat are the pretend greenies that have stopped us doing reduction burns.
Any home lost to a bushfire is the fault of people that stopped reduction burns and has nothing to do with “climate change”.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/ytk400TmAyA/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2023-12-13 15:25:272023-12-13 15:25:30Bushfires a Threat Created by Greenies, Not Climate Change
The Australian Department of Treasury website states that extreme weather events are expected to occur with increased frequency and severity. I asked in the recent senate estimates what sources Treasury had based this prediction. I was informed that it was consistent with the government-stated position on climate change and climate action.
Yet the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 6th Assessment Report on the Science says there have been no detectable increase in the number of natural disasters. It summarises the available scientific evidence on the signal of natural disasters and finds no change in signals for weather-related events, including river flood, rain in terms of heavy precipitation, landslide, drought, fire, wind speed, tropical cyclone, relative, sea level, coastal flood and marine heat wave.
The Minister was not prepared to take my question on notice regarding their source of empirical scientific data.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: The next one is fairly straightforward. A statement on the Treasury website states that ‘Extreme weather events are also expected to occur with increased severity and frequency’. On what are you basing that statement?
Ms Kelley: We worked with the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the AOFM in terms of the statement, and the statement is consistent with the government’s stated position on climate change and climate action. The statement uses publicly available information from the 2023-24 budget and the Annual Climate Change Statement.
Senator ROBERTS: I’m sure it’s consistent with lots of things, because you just told me where the sources of it are. I’ll go back to the quote: ‘Extreme weather events are also expected to occur with increased frequency and severity’. I’ll direct you to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s sixth assessment report on the science, chapter 12, table 12.12. That summarises the available scientific evidence on the signal of natural disasters. I’ll run through some of the types of disasters where the United Nations says there’s been no detectable increase in the number of natural disasters: frost; river flood; rain, measured in terms of heavy precipitation or mean precipitation; landslide; drought; fire weather; wind speed; windstorm; tropical cyclone; dust storm; heavy snowfall; hail; relative sea level; coastal flood; and marine heatwave. There’s been no change in signal for any of these events according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. So I’m wondering what type of weather event this increased risk you are claiming is going to come from. What type of natural disaster are you talking about?
Ms Kelley: That’s probably not my area within the department, so—
Senator ROBERTS: Do you think I should take it up with the department that you copied your policy from?
Ms Kelley: Yes, the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water is probably the most appropriate department.
Senator ROBERTS: So you’ve taken their material and just placed it on your website? You’ve trusted them.
Ms Kelley: We have been wholly consistent with government policy in terms of the statement. It’s informed by a range of different pieces of evidence.
Senator ROBERTS: Great. Thank you very much.
Senator Gallagher: Senator Roberts, I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this.
Senator ROBERTS: No, we don’t have to agree to disagree. We just have to get the data. Perhaps you could take it on notice, Minister, to get me that data.
CHAIR: Thank you very much—
Ms Kelley: Sorry, could I just add to the question about—
Senator ROBERTS: I wouldn’t be winking about it, Senator Gallagher.
Senator Gallagher: Eh?
Senator ROBERTS: I wouldn’t be winking about it.
Senator Gallagher: No, well, this comes up a lot—
Senator ROBERTS: This is costing this country trillions. This is costing our country trillions of dollars.
Senator Gallagher: I think, fundamentally, we have a different—
Senator ROBERTS: Mine’s informed by the data.
Senator Gallagher: You strongly object to climate science. We don’t.
Senator ROBERTS: I don’t reject it. That’s a false statement. I don’t reject the climate science; I follow the climate science.
CHAIR: Senator Roberts, thank you. Ms Kelley would like to make a final remark.
Ms Kelley: I just want to answer your question about the costs. I’ve got some clarification. We’ve borne our own costs, and Ms O’Donnell is bearing hers. There are no other decisions to be made about costs.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you very much. I just make the point that the minister is not willing to provide me with a source for that advice to the government. You’re a senior member of the government.
Senator Gallagher: I think at a number of estimates hearings, on a number of questions on notice, that information has been provided, Senator Roberts. If there’s anything further we can provide, I’m happy to add—
Senator ROBERTS: Senator Gallagher, I need to correct you. The logical scientific points, with the empirical scientific data, have never been provided to me by anyone.
CHAIR: Thank you. Thank you, Minister. Senator Roberts, I’m just going to make the decision that there’s a repetition to your line of questioning. Thank you very much for your brevity in general.
The Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) and the government claim that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are impacting the Earth’s climate above and beyond natural variation. The climate activists’ solution to that perceived problem is to drastically reduce the use of gas, petrol, coal, oil, diesel and the grazing of cattle, sheep and pigs.
Given that BOM claims carbon dioxide from human activity in Australia is contributing to a global situation in such a way that we must cease these activities, I asked the Bureau to provide me, on notice, with the total number of BOM weather stations such data is collected from.
Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels over the short term have continued to rise, even during the global financial crisis of 2009 and in 2020 during COVID lockdowns. In fact, real-world empirical evidence proves drastic cuts in human carbon output have no effect on atmospheric carbon levels.
I have put several questions on notice with Dr Andrew Johnson, Director of BOM, and look forward to receiving his responses.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you again for being here again. You and the government claim that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are detrimentally affecting climate and that, as a consequence, carbon dioxide from human activity needs to be cut, necessitating cuts in the use of gas, petrol, coal, oil, diesel and farm grazing of cattle, sheep and pigs. Given what you claim about carbon dioxide from human activity, could you please provide me, on notice, with the total number of bureau weather stations from which weather data is collected for the bureau to use, both those that the bureau operates and those that other individuals or entities operate, and, of them, the number that measure atmospheric carbon dioxide levels?
Dr Johnson: Okay. I can probably answer that now.
Senator ROBERTS: Sure.
Dr Johnson: The CO2 levels for our region are measured at Kennaook/Cape Grim, north-west Tasmania. That’s one of three, I think, global baseline CO2 measuring stations. That’s where those stations measure. There are many, many, many pieces of equipment in the field that measure local CO2 emissions for all sorts of reasons, but in terms of the global baseline station, that is at Cape Grim—Kennaook.
Senator ROBERTS: I want to know how many stations you have, how many your colleagues—
Dr Johnson: We’ll take it on notice.
Senator ROBERTS: And how many measure carbon dioxide levels.
Dr Johnson: Yes.
Senator ROBERTS: And could you provide the locations of any other entities’ stations that are measuring carbon dioxide levels whose data the bureau relies upon for its climate reports and claims, both within Australia and overseas? You’ve already mentioned three.
Dr Johnson: Yes.
Senator ROBERTS: That won’t be a problem. Now, if you look at the document I’ve tabled—
Dr Johnson: I’m sorry, I’m not in receipt of it—I’m now in receipt.
Chair: You may want to talk to it.
Senator ROBERTS: Yes. These are graphs from—the source data is Scripps institute and CSIRO. These are atmospheric carbon dioxide levels measured at those 10 points around the world. Now, it’s claimed that we need to cut the level of carbon dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere, and to do that we must cut carbon dioxide from human activity, correct? That’s what the claim is.
Dr Johnson: Senator, I’m not in a position to pass an opinion on that. Direct that to the department. All I can tell you is that, from our measurements of the changes that are occurring in the atmosphere, it couldn’t be clearer, in terms of the trends we’re observing, and our science—
Senator ROBERTS: I want to ask you about those trends.
Dr Johnson: And our science is very clear that the causes of those trends, to a very large extent, are human activities.
Senator ROBERTS: You claim that cutting human production of carbon dioxide will cut atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.
Dr Johnson: No. Just to reaffirm, it’s not our role to do that. Our role is to measure the atmospheric, oceanographic and, in some cases, terrestrial phenomena. We’ve never made such claims. All we’ve said is—
Senator ROBERTS: So you don’t—
Dr Johnson: that all of these parameters are rising and that the cause of that increase, to a very large extent—a predominant extent—is human activity. That’s all we’ve said.
Senator ROBERTS: So carbon dioxide from human activity is causing a rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Dr Johnson: And other emissions—methane and so on—are causing the escalation in oceanic and atmospheric temperatures.
Senator ROBERTS: In 2009, after the global financial crisis, and in 2020, during the COVID lockdowns, we experienced severe global recessions. During those recessions, energy use fell dramatically and the use of hydrocarbon fuels like coal, oil and natural gas for transport, residences and industry was cut severely, leading to dramatic reductions of carbon dioxide from human activity. Yet, despite those cuts in human carbon dioxide production, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels continued to rise.
Dr Johnson: Correct.
Senator ROBERTS: All the Scripps and CSIRO measurement stations reveal no decrease or downward inflection, just continued rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. This real-world empirical evidence proves that drastic cuts in carbon dioxide from human activity have no effect on atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Making the drastic cuts is pointless and is damaging economically and socially. On notice, could you please specify the dates, quantity and duration of any inflections or downturns on those graphs?
Dr Johnson: I’m happy to, Senator. But, very quickly—with the chair’s indulgence—the premise of your question is false. It is a well-established fact that the consequences of human activity have long lag periods between when they occur and when they’re observed in the atmosphere. So, even if CO2 emissions were to stop today, the atmosphere is loaded, as is the ocean, and it will take centuries for that signature to work its way through; hence the urgency around the challenge to reduce emissions now.
Senator ROBERTS: How well is carbon dioxide mixed in the atmosphere?
Dr Johnson: How well is it mixed?
Senator ROBERTS: How well mixed is it?
Dr Johnson: I’m not an expert on carbon dioxide atmospheric mixing.
Senator ROBERTS: How does it vary temporally, spatially and with regard to surface cover—for example, vegetation type?
Dr Johnson: I’d have to take that on notice. I’m not in expert in those matters.
Senator ROBERTS: Could you take the next question on notice as well. Given that the atmospheric carbon dioxide levels over—
Senator Whish-Wilson: Could you just put them on notice now? Could it go to us, because people are waiting?
Senator ROBERTS: I want to get this to make sure I’ve got the question right for Dr Johnson. I’ll put the other two on notice after this. Given that the atmospheric carbon dioxide levels over the short term and without spatial and temporal context have increased substantially, what impact has this had on global and national atmospheric temperatures? Specifically, what is the rate of temperature increase over the period 1995 to today?
Dr Johnson: Again, you’re asking me a specific question on a specific set of dates. I don’t have that number with me.
Senator ROBERTS: No, on notice. I’m happy for you to do that on notice.
Dr Johnson: If we have that data, I’ll provide it, sure.
Senator ROBERTS: I’m sure you’ve got the temperature data. Could you please specify in your answer the statistical methods and procedures, as well as the data periods and sources of data. Could you please use the global and national atmospheric temperature data from the following sources: from the Bureau of Meteorology, obviously, atmospheric temperature data for Australia and the world—
Chair: Senator Roberts, you can log them in writing, if you would like. And, if you’re asking for an answer, you probably shouldn’t specify where they get the data from. It would be entirely up to them if you’re asking-
Senator ROBERTS: No, I’m not specifying the data. I just want some alternatives because there’s variation between—
Chair: But I will speed you up, Senator Roberts.
Senator ROBERTS: I’m happy to put them on notice.
Chair: That would be lovely.
Senator ROBERTS: I’ll also be asking you for NASA’s University of Alabama, Huntsville, and RSS data.
Dr Johnson: You’d probably best direct your questions about NASA data to NASA.
John F. Klauser, winner of the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work in quantum mechanics, went public last week with the following statement – “I can confidently say there is no real climate crisis and that climate change does not cause extreme weather events.” In response, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the financial arm of the United Nations, cancelled his scheduled speaking engagements.
Silencing scientists won’t save the great global warming scam though. Top US climate scientists have correctly rubbished claims that the Northern Hemisphere’s July was the hottest month on record.
In an article published in The Australian last month, Cliff Mass, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Washington, said the public is being “misinformed on a massive scale” and that there’s a “stunning amount of exaggeration and hype of extreme weather and heatwaves”.
Forests that have been overgrown and not taken care of have a tendency, when a fire is started, to burn catastrophically. When we blame climate change for this rather than environmental mismanagement, we fail to deal with the real problems.
John Christy, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Alabama, which runs the official NASA satellite temperature records, says heatwaves in the first half of the 20th century were at least as intense as recent ones. In fact, the increase in temperature since 1978 is only 0.3°C in keeping with temperature trends since the mini ice age 200 years ago. Measuring mean temperatures is confounded by urban creep. The growth of cities has subjected existing weather stations to additional heat. “In central Houston, for example, it is now between 6 and 9°F warmer than the surrounding countryside, explained Prof Christy.” It’s worth noting here that large solar arrays create the same heat sink effect as creeping urbanisation.
Despite the concerted efforts of climate alarmists to control the narrative, there are growing numbers of scientists and experts who are distancing themselves from the climate pseudoscience promoted by government agencies and the media. Even Jim Skier, head of the UN climate body, says a 1.5° temperature rise is not an existential threat to humanity. There is no climate crisis.
Transcript
As a servant to the many different people who make up our one Queensland community, I asked the question: Can you feel the winds of change? Leading climate alarmists are deserting their ship. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres demonstrates just how out of touch climate carpetbaggers really are. The only thing boiling dry is Antonio Guterres’s credibility. Nobel science prize winner John Clauser last week publicly stated, ‘I can confidently say there is no real climate crisis and that climate change does not cause extreme weather events.’ After saying that, the IMF cancelled his scheduled tour. Silencing scientists won’t save the great global warming scam. An excellent article in The Australian reveals two of America’s top climate scientists have correctly rubbished claims July was the hottest month on record, deploring a ‘stunning amount of exaggeration and hype’.
Cliff Mass, professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington said the public was being quite ‘misinformed on a massive scale, with a massive amount of exaggeration. He goes on, ‘In Houston, for example, in the city centre it is between six and nine degrees centigrade higher than in the surrounding countryside.’ That isn’t global warming; that is the urban heat island effect, which, by the way, is easily countered—plant trees.
John Christy, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Alabama Huntsville, said heatwaves in the first half of the 20th century were at least as intense as those recent heatwaves. This is the university that runs the official NASA satellite temperature record, the umpire of datasets, which shows an increase in temperatures since 1978 of only 0.3 degrees centigrade, on trend with temperature trends since the mini ice age 200 years ago. Even the warmer-in-chief, Jim Skea at the head of the UN’s climate body says, ‘1.5 degrees temperature rise is not an existential threat to humanity. we will not die out.’
https://img.youtube.com/vi/EplH2WtD40o/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Sheenagh Langdonhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSheenagh Langdon2023-09-14 10:52:202023-09-18 13:40:03Nobel Prize Winner in Physics Says There Is No Climate Emergency
I will be joining Dr William Bay, Dave Pellowe, Dylan Oakley and Graham Healy as a guest speaker at the Pullman Hotel, Brisbane on Sunday, 29 October 2023.
Early Bird Price: Book and pay before 5pm Friday, 7 October 2023 to receive $20.00 discount.
https://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.png00Sheenagh Langdonhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSheenagh Langdon2023-09-11 19:46:582023-09-12 07:35:05RESCHEDULED DATE: A Future Vision for Australia
