Parliamentary report devastates
'Global Warming' scam
Print Version
PDF
The Australian Federal Parliament's Standing Committee on Science
and Innovation recently completed a report entitled Between a Rock and a Hard
Place, on the subject of "Geosequestration of Carbon Dioxide". However, four
members of that committee have issued a "Dissenting Report" which devastates the
Committee's major premise — that mankind causes global warming.
The dissenting MPs are former CSIRO scientist Dr. Dennis Jensen, Hon Jackie
Kelly, Hon Danna Vale and Mr. David Tollner. Their report was compiled with the
assistance of a number of leading scientists, including climate scientist Dr.
John Christy, former lead author of the IPCC. It is a must read for anyone
concerned with the subject.
They state at the very outset that, "We disagree with the report's
unequivocal support for the hypothesis that global warming is caused by
man—so-called anthropogenic global warming (AGW). We are concerned that the
Committee's report strays well outside its terms of reference. In fact, the
committee did not take any evidence relating to anthropogenic global warming."
Some of the chief points of their refutation include:
* Global warming is observed on other planets or moons, including Mars,
Jupiter, Triton, Pluto, Neptune and others. Did man cause this?
* That the so-called "overwhelming consensus" embodied in the IPCC report has
nothing to do with science, nor does such a consensus even exist. It is in fact
drawn from its "Summary for Policymakers" which was written by politicians, not
by scientists, and its supposed "90% certainty" is backed up by nothing in the
report, but is merely a "consensus opinion arrived at by IPCC bureaucrats"; and,
in any case, so-called "democratic consensus" is entirely opposed to scientific
method. "Consensus", for instance, once held that the earth was at the centre of
the universe, and that it was flat.
* That the "Stern Review" upon which the Committee based its majority report,
was drafted by a man who "acknowledges that he had zero understanding of the
issue less than one year before the Stern Review … It is staggering that someone
with essentially no scientific knowledge on greenhouse effect, within less than
one year, had acquired the scientific knowledge to state that the 'scientific
evidence is now overwhelming'."
* "Indeed, if one paragraph clearly illustrates the one sided nature of this
report," the dissenters say, "it is paragraph 5.59. Here, we have a captain of
industry (Rupert Murdoch), who, by his own admission is not a scientist, quoted
regarding his view on anthropogenic global warming and the need to take action",
citing Murdoch's claims that "climate change poses clear catastrophic threats."
There is much more, on glaciers, rising sea levels, Australia's rainfall
patterns, etc., and the report is extensively footnoted. It may be accessed at:
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/scin/geosequestration/report/dissent.pdf | 
