The world as we know it

Self imposed planet messiahs in process of destroying planet

The self promoted, self instated, self adulating high priest elitists in the green religion have been using fear to control the masses for decades now as a means of tapping people’s bank accounts & draining government income with current theft by green lies now exceeding $1 trillion dollars. This has given rise to many obscenely paid green high priests championing their causes for personal profit, typically as NGOs supported by green governments.

Drunk on their own greed and power the greenies who think they know better, who think they don’t have to answer to the ‘ignorant masses’, who think they are morally superior than the rest of us, look at causing far more damage to the planet than they were ever able to falsely fix. And all by the means of ego-engineering. The latest IPCC climate porn edition says even though the world is not warming we have to take drastic measures to cool it, all the while implementing warming taxes.

The result of these actions whilst we are going into solar minimum of solarcycle24 and solarcycle25 will be massive carbon tax induced fuel poverty with deepening solar induced cold exacerbated by green government cooling by geoengineering. End result cold genocide & massive depopulation of the planet. Exactly what these elitists want under Agenda21, their communist blueprint for the future, ridding the world of the virus of humanity so those morally superior in the green way can enjoy it all for themselves.

They may get rid of the rest of us but ultimately they may create a hell of their own making that they cannot escape from.

IPCC report falsely warns world won’t cool without geoengineering ;


CIA study looks at geoengineering to reverse global warming


Geoengineering watch;


Filed under: Governance, , , , ,

Governments admit chemtrail is geoengineering

Chemtrails are no longer a conspiracy theory. With governments admitting they are doing them, to cool the planet, because of the global warming fraud, it seems democracy is indeed dead. Governments have gone from being public servants to public overlords, thinking they know better and are entitled to do as they please without the people’s consent. This story as follows ;

Some conspiracy theories are crazy. Some turn out correct. It now turns out that one of the craziest-sounding and most dismissed conspiracy subjects is actually true: chemtrails.
The revelation comes straight from the horse’s mouth: the Council on Foreign Relation’s own flagship source, Foreign Affairs.
[I]t is becoming increasingly likely that governments will adopt risky strategies, known as “geoengineering,” to rapidly cool the planet. Four years ago, in order to raise awareness about geoengineering, we published “The Geoengineering Option” in Foreign Affairs. Almost nobody thought that such tactics — which included spraying particles into the upper atmosphere to make the earth more reflective, akin to how big volcanoes cool the planet — were a particularly good option. The risks were simply too great and the unknowns too many. . . .”

For the full story go here;


Filed under: Governance, , , ,

Be sure of this, the Globalists refuse accountability

The arts of power and its minions are the same in all countries and in all ages. It marks its victim, denounces it, and excites the public odium and public hatred, to conceal its own abuses and encroachments.–Henry Clay

To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, legislated at, regulated, docketed, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, assessed, weighed, censored, ordered about, by men who have neither the right, nor the knowledge, nor the virtue.–Peirre-Joseph Proudhon

Everywhere you turn the globalists and the puppet governments refuse to be accountable, act with impunity and believe they are above the law. Just watching the Gillard ALP in Australia where the government that has presided over more than 700 deaths, hundreds of house fires, tens of billions squandered, corruption at every turn and yet remains in power, refusing to be transparent or accountable to the people. This week has been replete with examples of that as Gillards past corruption comes to light whilst she stonewalls & refuses answers. Her fraud & all the appointments to positions of power she has made for accomplices and mates are finally being laid bare but she refuses to budge.

Then there is Australia’s carbon tax legislation which Gillard ensured to the people pre election she wouldn’t bring in, and yet had every intent on doing so and deceptively did so and that in a manner that defied every democratic process and made a mockery of representational government. To be true we are no longer governed by and for the people but simply ruled by elitists believing themselves to be above the ‘little people’. To Gillard the end justifies the means and has no problem with lying as long as she accomplishes her fabian (creeping) socialist ideals – the pinnacle of which is the carbon tax. Keep in mind that the carbon taxes are nothing but wealth redistribution – historically one of Gillards favorite socialist endeavors, and one that conveniently funds the UN and its global governance as well. The carbon tax is nothing but centralised power & where that power is shifting from a national/Australian level to an international/UN level. All the rules and laws of the carbon tax come from the UN, not from the Australian people and allegiance to the UN is nothing short of allegiance to a foreign power – or treason as our constitution would define it, tyrannical treason.

The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.–James Madison

Also keep in mind the most expensive carbon tax in the world will only go up. Also keep in mind that ex Goldman Sachs bankster Turncoat Turnbull is another globalist puppet waiting ready in the wings to replace Abbott who vows to repeal this law of enslavement. No we the people don’t want Turnbull but what we the people think doesnt seem to matter anymore.

There is no democracy under globalism. The UN is the least accountable bureaucracy in the world. It is also the least democratic as we the people have no say, it has no elections and does as it pleases. Is it any wonder that its socialist puppets behave in the same manner – Gillard & Obama in particular refuse transparency, accountability or scrutiny. The more centralised the power, the less voice that the people have. We would head the wise words;

Necessity is the plea of every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.–William Pitt, the Younger

No where has the impingement of human freedom been more obvious than the fabricated global warming alarmism, where all the free things we hold dear are being removed by the lying excuse of saving the planet. The planet isnt dying, the world does not have a fever, extreme weather events are not increasing – all lies to push a lie. Our green tyrants are turning us into nothing more than slaves. And if the UN’s Agenda 21 gets fully implemented then tragically in comparison the holocaust will look like a picnic in the park.

UN has absolute immunity in sexual harassment ;

Fear is what is needed in a despotism. Virtue is not at all necessary, and honor would be dangerous.–Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , ,

Climate shifting to little ice age conditions

As forecast by Piers Corbyn recently the jet streams are shifting to mini ice age conditions, both in the NH and SH.US national weather service reports;

During tonight’s weather balloon launch, we observed an anomalously strong jet stream at the top of the troposphere (where the majority of weather happens). Winds were measured at 148 mph at approximately 36,000 and 41,000 feet. The jet stream has dipped far south over the last few days and has created a deep trough over the eastern U.S“.

Little ice age conditions are where the jet streams strengthen and move closer to the equator. As the jet streams head towards the equator polar air reaches closer to the equator also bringing more cold and snow to the regions in between. The jet stream shifts are because of a quiet sun with low sunspot activity like the little ice age in the 1700s.

Also with a low sunspot count according to Svensmark theory we get more cloudiness and further cold as the earth is shaded. With the magnetic field of the earth dropping this exacerbates the problem, allowing more cosmic rays in as the atmosphere cracks. Increasing volcanism which can also happen during magnetic field & solar declines can add significant amounts of sulphur to the atmosphere which has a further shielding effect of the sun.

Despite the predictions by the global warming protagonists )mostly who profit from the false scare), the snowline in Australia is not climbing, and snow isnt becoming extinct – in fact the opposite is happening. This year marks good snowfalls, often to low levels with last week the resorts getting up to a metre of snow with more on the way this week.

So while we have Gillards socialist wealth redistribution program under the false guise of a warming tax, there is a deepening deadly cold ahead. As the ALP government induced electricity prices skyrocket lets be thankful summer is on the way for Australians. For the northern hemisphere as winter approaches many innocent people wont be so lucky to escape the deadly cold.

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , ,

Taupo volcanic zone update – more eruptions likely

Update; GNS science hotspot map released showing areas most at risk;

With the Taupo volcanic zone in New Zealand starting to rumble back into life many have expressed an interest in what is going on in New Zealand. The NZ government has highlighted the extreme dangers of the zone and the need to be watchful.

Tests have revealed that magna is bubbling higher than normal in Tongariro Volcano meaning further eruptions are likely. “We’re now convinced that the likelihood of this just being a one-off has decreased,” said GNS vulcanologist Nico Fournier. This magma may be mere metres higher or worryingly kilometers higher.

With the decline of the earth’s magnetic field there is also concern that this correlates with an increase in global volcanism. Likewise the change in the sun’s sunspot cycle is also likely to be a contributing factor in increasing seismic and volcanic activity. Currently solar cycle 24 is almost flatlining creating a regime change that is likely to affect the earth in numerous ways.

OK here’s a list of online resources to keep up to date on the Taupo volcanic zone;

1. Geonet near real–time shaking intensity from New Zealand’s network of seismographs. Earthquakes are often a precursar to volcanic activity as movement of magma & plates often but not always precede erutptions. For global earthquake monitoring there are also the following sites;

USGS real time global earthquake map ; Live global earthquake map ; Global seismic monitor ; Earth alerts

2. Volcano alert system

The New Zealand volcano alert system is as follows (note it is not identical to the rest of the world);

Scientific Alert Level  Indicative Phenomena  Volcano Status 
0 Typical background surface activity; seismicity, deformation and heat flow at low levels.  Usual dormant, or quiescent state.
1 Apparent seismic, geodetic, thermal or other unrest indicators.  Initial signs of possible volcano unrest. No eruption threat. 
2 Increase in number or intensity of unrest indicators (seismicity, deformation, heat flow etc).  Confirmation of volcano unrest. Eruption threat. 
3 Minor steam eruptions. High-increasing trends of unrest indicators, significant effects on volcano, possibly beyond.  Minor eruptions commenced. Real possibility of hazardous eruptions.
4 Eruption of new magma. Sustained high levels of unrest indicators, significant effects beyond volcano.  Hazardous local eruption in progress. Large scale eruption now possible. 
5 Destruction with major damage beyond active volcano. Significant risk over wider areas. Large hazardous volcanic eruption in progress. 

NZ volcano updates can be viewed at the following sites;

GEOnet current volcanic activity updates ; NZ volcanic alert bulletins ; Volcanic ash advisoriesNew Zealand volcano updates ; USGS weekly volcanic update report ; NZ ministry of Civil defense ;

Also local news – like the NZ Herald can have volcano news. Volcanoes in New Zealand

And for interest here is a super volcano comparison. Taupo is the most recent super volcano to erupt, which it normally does every 1000 yrs or so, though the last eruption was 1800 years ago. Earth changes, 2012 and ancient knowledge. The Mayans, The Maoris inhabited New Zealand quite recently – from the 14th century. Many of their legends surround the volcanos and Lake Taupo as well. Lake Taupo characteristics & environment ;

While we are on the topic of NZ here is the real time Christchurch earthquake monitor.

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Is the super volcano Taupo awakening?

More updates now available at the newer post – click here

Update 3; OK this is getting more interesting and alarming by the day. The pumice debris in the ocean comes from a third erupting NZ volcano – Mt Monowai. This undersea volcano has one of the fastest growth rates of any modern volcano.Like with Krakatoa it is possible the pumice could find its way all the way to the Americas.

Meanwhile there is a 50% chance of further eruptions at Tongariro with a couple of thousand tonnes of sulphur dioxide gas having been emitted by the Volcano with lava bubbling under the surface.

Meanwhile it has been stated by scientists that previous eruptions in the Taupo volcanic zone would have been visible from Sydney Australia – such was the magnitude of them.

Update 2; Volcanic debris the size of Belgium found floating off the coast of NZ. More here

Update; Magna bubbles under Tongariro – further eruptions likely.

1800 years ago Taupo volcano in New Zealand had the largest volcanic eruption in the world for the last 5000 years. Taupo ejected over 30 cubic kilometers of material including a pyroclastic flow that moved at 600-900km/hr, traveling up mountains to a height of 1500m .

But even that massive eruption was dwarfed by the huge Taupo eruption just 26,500 years ago which plunged the earth into a volcanic winter & wiped out 60% of the population. From wikipedia;

The Oruanui eruption of the Taupo volcano was the world’s largest known eruption in the past 70,000 years, with a Volcanic Explosivity Index of 8. It occurred around 26,500 years ago and generated approximately 430 km³ of pyroclastic fall deposits, 320 km³ of pyroclastic density current (PDC) deposits (mostly ignimbrite) and 420 km³ of primary intracaldera material, equivalent to 530 km³ of magma. [4] [5] [6]

Modern Lake Taupo partly fills the caldera generated during this eruption.

Tephra from the eruption covered much of the central North Island with ignimbrite up to 200 metres deep. Most of New Zealand was affected by ash fall, with even an 18 cm ash layer left on the Chatham Islands, 1,000 km away. Later erosion and sedimentation had long-lasting effects on the landscape, and caused the Waikato River to shift from the Hauraki Plains to its current course through the Waikato to the Tasman Sea.

This eruption was the largest volcanic eruption in the world in the last 70,000 years. When you consider the pyroclastic flows from this eruption were up to 100m deep (yes the height of a 30 story building), and extended up to 100km from the volcano then this is a volcanic area to keep a close eye upon. Especially as this volcano erupts every 2000 years and erupted around 1800 years ago.

Taupo volcanic zone is one of the most active in the world, The last 3 months has seen many small earthquakes around Taupo but there seems an increase in tectonic activity in recent years with a 6.5 quake just last year and another 5 quake last month. With volcanic eruptions Tongariro erupted unexpectedly this week with White Island erupting yesterday.

In 2006 Geologists warned Rotorua, Taupo and Whakatane are set to be wiped out in a massive overdue earthquake. An Alpine fault quake is a certainty where East Cape would rip away from New Zealand, destroying the plateau that Rotorua is based on and taking Taupo and Whakatane with it. It is only a matter of when. “The interval since the last event (in 1717) is longer than any interval between known earlier events.”

As Christchurch keeps getting hit with earthquakes & liquefaction is New Zealand waking up in accord with it’s cycles? There is also speculation that volcanic activity coincides with low sunspot activity – with solar cycle 24 flat-lining it will be nteresting times ahead!

The east coast of Australia is at risk from tsunami

Geothermal system of the Taupo volcanic zone ; Great lake Taupo ;

Tongariro eruption ash study & fluoride ; Tongariro volcano ;

Psychic predictions – Taupo will blow! ; Maori elder also says so ;

When will the next big eruption happen?

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The subterfuge of controlling the global warming narrative

This is not science the way we were told it works. This is not independent scientists working without conflicts of interest focusing on the data, submitting their results for independent assessment, being at arms length to the assessors and publishers. No this is real life story of the control of the press (Nature, Science and others), control of the editors and attacks on the non compliant ones, control of peer review, vilification of opponents work, manipulating political processes and controlling the narrative. This is a process where more of the ‘scientists’ energy is put into controlling their positions than seems is ever put into the science. And keep in mind these guys are on the government payroll and should be open and transparent in all their dealings.

This is also a story of a select group of individuals in positions of power paid for by the taxpayers, believing they are above reproach and cannot be wrong. This is about the religious fervor with which these global warming scientists banded together on group think to meet, plot and enact compliant acts of vilification against scientists whose studies threatened their work. There are few degrees of separation, if any between these so called scientists and the highest powers in many of the worlds nations. Additionally there is the menace of those in global governance aiding and abetting them. The following emails are almost a script for a movie on global warming eco elite’s subterfuge.

Bold mine, comments in red mine

Formatting removed to make it easier to read. You can read the original file here

Phil Jones, Mike Hulme, Keith Briffa, James Hansen, Danny Harvey, Ben Santer, Kevin Trenberth, Robert wilby, Tom Karl , Steve Schneider, Tom Crowley, jto , “simon.shackley” , “tim.carter”, “p.martens”, “peter.whetton”, “c.goodess” , “a.minns” , Wolfgang Cramer , “j.salinger” , “simon.torok” , Scott Rutherford, Neville Nicholls, Ray Bradley, Mike MacCracken , Barrie Pittock, Ellen Mosley-Thompson, “Greg.Ayers”

date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 12:39:14 -0400
from: “Michael E. Mann”
subject: Re: My turn

HI Mark,

Thanks for your comments, and sorry to any of you who don’t wish to receive these correspondances…

Indeed, I have provided David Halpern with a written set of comments on the offending paper(s) for internal use, so that he was armed w/ specifics as he confronts the issue within OSTP. He may have gotten additional comments from other individuals as well–I’m not sure. I believe that the matter is in good hands with Dave, but we have to wait and see what happens. In any case, I’d be happy to provide my comments to anyone who is interested.

I think that a response to “Climate Research” is not a good idea. Phil and I discussed this, and agreed that it would be largely unread, and would tend to legitimize a paper which many of us don’t view as having passed peer review in a legitimate manner. On the other hand, the in prep. review articles by Jones and Mann (Rev. Geophys.), and Bradley/Hughes/Diaz (Science) should go along way towards clarification of the issues (and, at least tangentially, refutation of the worst of the claims of Baliunas and co). Both should be good resources for the FAR as well…



p.s. note the corrections to some of the emails in the original distribution list.

At 09:27 AM 4/24/Mark Eakin wrote: At this point the question is what to do about the Soon and Baliunas
paper. Would Bradley, Mann, Hughes et al. be willing to develop and appropriate rebuttal? If so, the question at hand is where it would be best to direct such a response. Some options are:

1) A rebuttal in Climate Research
2) A rebuttal article in a journal of higher reputation
3) A letter to OSTP

The first is a good approach, as it keeps the argument to the level of the current publication. The second would be appropriate if the Soon and Baliunas paper were gaining attention at a more general level, but it is not. Therefore, a rebuttal someplace like Science or Nature would probably do the opposite of what is desired here by raising the attention to the paper. The best way to take care of getting better science out in a widely read journal is the piece that Bradley et al. are preparing for Nature. This leaves the idea of a rebuttal in Climate Research as the best published approach.

A letter to OSTP is probably in order here. Since the White House has shown interest in this paper, OSTP really does need to receive a measured, critical discussion of flaws in Soon and Baliunas’ methods. I agree with Tom that a noted group from the detection and attribution effort such as Mann, Crowley, Briffa, Bradley, Jones and Hughes should spearhead such a letter. Many others of us could sign on in support. This would provide Dave Halpern with the ammunition he needs to provide the White House with the needed documentation that hopefully will dismiss this paper for the slipshod work that it is. Such a letter could be developed in parallel with a rebuttal article.

I have not received all of the earlier e-mails, so my apologies if I am rehashing parts of the discussion that might have taken place elsewhere.


Michael E. Mann wrote:

Dear Tom et al,

Thanks for comments–I see we’ve built up an impressive distribution list here!

This seemed like an appropriate point for me to chime in here. By in large, I agree w/ Tom’s comments (and those of Barrie’s as well). A number of us have written reviews and overviews of this topic during the past couple years. There has been a lot of significant scientific process in this area (both with regard to empirical “climate reconstruction” and in the area of model/data comparison), including, in fact, detection studies along the lines of what Barrie Pittock asked about in a previous email (see. e.g. Tom Crowley’s Science article from 2000). Phil Jones and I are in the process of writing a review article for /Reviews of Geophysics/ which will, among other things, dispel the most severe of the myths that some of these folks are perpetuating regarding past climate change in past centuries. My understanding is that Ray Bradley, Malcolm Hughes, and Henry Diaz are working, independently, on a solicited piece for /Science/ on the “Medieval Warm Period”. Many have simply dismissed the Baliunas et al pieces because, from a scientific point of view, they are awful–that is certainly true. For example, Neville has pointed out in a previous email, that the standard they applied for finding “a Medieval Warm Period” was that a particular proxy record exhibit a 50 year interval during the period that was anomalously *warm*, *wet*, or *dry* relative to the “20th century” (many of the proxy records don’t really even resolve the late 20th century!) could be used to define an “MWP” anywhere one might like to find one. This was the basis for their press release arguing for a “MWP” that was “warmer than the 20th century” (a non-sequitur even from their awful paper!) (it is worth noting that …) and for their bashing of IPCC and scientists who contributed to IPCC (which, I understand, has been particularly viscious and ad hominem inside closed rooms in Washington DC where their words don’t make it into the public record). This might all seem laughable, it weren’t the case that they’ve gotten the (Bush) White House Office of Science & Technology taking it as a serious matter (fortunately, Dave Halpern is in charge of this project, and he is likely to handle this appropriately, but without some external pressure).

So while our careful efforts to debunk the myths perpetuated by these folks may be useful in the FAR, they will be of limited use in fighting the disinformation campaign that is already underway in Washington DC. Here, I tend to concur at least in sprit w/ Jim Salinger, that other approaches may be necessary. I would emphasize that there are indeed, as Tom notes, some unique aspects of this latest assault by the skeptics which are cause for special concern. This latest assault uses a compromised peer-review process as a vehicle for launching a scientific disinformation campaign (often viscious and ad hominem) under the guise of apparently legitimately reviewed science, allowing them to make use of the “Harvard” moniker in the process. Fortunately, the mainstream media never touched the story (mostly it has appeared in papers owned by Murdoch and his crowd (the demonising of Murdoch begins, which is still being pursued by Gillard) , and dubious fringe on-line outlets). Much like a server which has been compromised as a launching point for computer viruses, I fear that “Climate Research” has become a hopelessly compromised vehicle in the skeptics’ (can we find a better word?) (yes denier was what they chose). disinformation campaign, and some of the discussion that I’ve seen (e.g. a potential threat of mass resignation among the legitimate members of the CR editorial board) seems, in my opinion, to have some potential merit.

This should be justified not on the basis of the publication of science we may not like of course, but based on the evidence (e.g. as provided by Tom and Danny Harvey and I’m sure there is much more) that a legitimate peer-review process has not been followed by at least one particular editor. Incidentally, the problems alluded to at GRL are of a different nature–there are simply too many papers, and too few editors w/ appropriate disciplinary expertise, to get many of the papers submitted there properly reviewed. Its simply hit or miss with respect to whom the chosen editor is. While it was easy to make sure that the worst papers, perhaps including certain ones Tom refers to, didn’t see the light of the day at /J. Climate/, it was inevitable that such papers might slip through the cracks at e.g. GRL–there is probably little that can be done here, other than making sure that some qualified and responsible climate scientists step up to the plate and take on editorial positions at GRL.

best regards,


At 11:53 PM 4/23/Tom Wigley wrote:

Dear friends,

[Apologies to those I have missed who have been part of this email exchange — although they may be glad to have been missed]

I think Barrie Pittock has the right idea — although there are some unique things about this situation. Barrie says ….

(1) There are lots of bad papers out there
(2) The best response is probably to write a ‘rebuttal’

to which I add ….

(3) A published rebuttal will help IPCC authors in the 4AR.


Let me give you an example. There was a paper a few years ago by Legates and Davis in GRL (vol. 24, ppREDACTED 1997) that was nothing more than a direct and pointed criticism of some work by Santer and me — yet neither of us was asked to review the paper. We complained, and GRL admitted it was poor judgment on the part of the editor. Eventually (> 2 years later) we wrote a response (GRLREDACTEDREDACTEDHowever, our response was more that just a rebuttal, it was an attempt to clarify some issues on detection. In doing things this way we tried to make it clear that the original Legates/Davis paper was an example of bad science (more bluntly, either sophomoric ignorance or deliberate misrepresentation).

Any rebuttal must point out very clearly the flaws in the original paper. If some new science (or explanations) can be added — as we did in the above example — then this is an advantage.


There is some personal judgment involved in deciding whether to rebut. Correcting bad science is the first concern. Responding to unfair personal criticisms is next. Third is the possible misrepresentation of the results by persons with ideological or political agendas. On the basis of these I think the Baliunas paper should be rebutted by persons with appropriate expertise. Names like Mann, Crowley, Briffa, Bradley, Jones, Hughes come to mind. Are these people willing to spend time on this?


There are two other examples that I know of where I will probably be involved in writing a response.

The first is a paper by Douglass and Clader in GRL (vol. 29, no. 16, 10.1029/2002GLREDACTED). I refereed a virtually identical paper for J. Climate, recommending rejection. All the other referees recommended rejection too. The paper is truly appalling — but somehow it must have been poorly reviewed by GRL and slipped through the net. I have no
reason to believe that this was anything more than chance. Nevertheless, my judgment is that the science is so bad that a response is necessary.

The second is the paper by Michaels et al. that was in Climate Research (vol. 23, ppREDACTED Danny Harvey and I refereed this and said it should be rejected. We questioned the editor (deFreitas again!) and he responded saying …

The MS was reviewed initially by five referees. … The other three referees, all reputable atmospheric scientists, agreed it should be published subject to minor revision. Even then I used a sixth person to help me decide. I took his advice and that of the three other referees and sent the MS back for revision. It was later accepted for publication. The refereeing process was more rigorous than usual.

On the surface this looks to be above board — although, as referees who advised rejection it is clear that Danny and I should have been kept in the loop and seen how our criticisms were responded to.

It is possible that Danny and I might write a response to this paper — deFreitas has offered us this possibility.


This second case gets to the crux of the matter. I suspect that deFreitas deliberately chose other referees who are members of the skeptics camp. I also suspect that he has done this on other occasions. How to deal with this is unclear, since there are a number of individuals with bona fide scientific credentials who could be used by an unscrupulous editor to ensure that ‘anti-greenhouse’ science can get through the peer review process (Legates, Balling, Lindzen, Baliunas,
Soon, and so on).

The peer review process is being abused, but proving this would be difficult.

The best response is, I strongly believe, to rebut the bad science that does get through.


Jim Salinger raises the more personal issue of deFreitas. He is clearly giving good science a bad name, but I do not think a barrage of ad hominem attacks or letters is the best way to counter this.

If Jim wishes to write a letter with multiple authors, I may be willing to sign it, but I would not write such a letter myself.

In this case, deFreitas is such a poor scientist that he may simply disappear. I saw some work from his PhD, and it was awful (Pat Michaels’ PhD is at the same level).

Best wishes to all,
Professor Michael E. Mann
Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
e-mail:  Phone:770 FAX:137

C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D.
Chief of NOAA Paleoclimatology Program and
Director of the World Data Center for Paleoclimatology

NOAA/National Climatic Data Center
325 Broadway E/CC23
Professor Michael E. Mann
Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903

It is worth noting on the science that far from being bad science

Who is who in the above emails – a cast of ….

Michael Mann – inventor or should one say the fabricator of the discredited hockey stick. Previously employed by Penn State. Currently under investigation for use of grants.

Mark Eakin – Chief of NOAA Paleoclimatology Program and Director of the World Data Center for Paleoclimatology

Phil Jones – UAE chief concedes “all our models are wrong“, refuses FOI requests, and has acknowledged there has been no statistically significant global warming since 1995.

Mike Hulme – Professor of Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia (UEA)

Keith Briffa, Professor at the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia asks colleagues to delete emails, discusses manipulating the data,

James Hansen, NASA astronomer turned climate ‘guru’ who is current financial scandal is how he is making over $1.5 million dollars of undeclared income on top of his government paid position,

Danny Harvey,

Ben Santer, Research scientist on climate models angry that climate skeptics arnt silenced, keeps moving the climate goalposts to suit his failed theories,

Kevin Trenberth, Senior Scientist NCAR. who said in October 2009 ” The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not! It is a travesty!

Robert Wilby, Professor of Hydroclimatic Modelling

Tom Karl ,

Steve Schneider, Professor of Environmental Biology and Global Change at Stanford University

Tom Crowley, Simon Shackley,  Tim Carter,  P Marten,  Peter Whetton,  C Goodes,  A Minn,  Wolfgang Crame,  Jim Salinger CRSNZ NIWA,  Simon Toro,  Scott Rutherfor,  Neville Nicholl,  Ray Bradle,  Mike MacCracke,  Barrie Pittoc,  Ellen Mosley-Thompso,  Greg Ayers

Climategate ; Biased BBC ;

CSIRO clanger – “which representation of the results is appropriate to giving the best advice on what changes to expect”

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A climate of corruption

The last 24 hours has seen the second leaking of emails of ‘scientists’ from the ‘hallowed halls’ of governments (state, federal and global) and it is much more of the same as climategate 1. Corruption, lies, fraud, deception, unaccountability, refusal of transparency etc You would have thought those in power learnt their lesson after climategate pt 1 but no there were the repeated whitewashes, repeated cover ups, repeated spin, repeated attacks on and vilification of skeptics and the hellish push to get the climate cash through via a massive social re-engineering trojan carbon tax.

An example of how those in government positions and in the UN refuse to be accountable to the public;

<2440> Jones: “I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process


<2884> Wigley: Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive […] there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC […]

Says it all doesn’t it. Don’t forget the UN is non democratic and now we learn they are also above the law. Is this the sort of global government you want our UN puppet governments to parrot! Or how about this one of Mann’s hockey stick that Al Gore paraded to the world;

<3373> Bradley: I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year “reconstruction”.

Or if you want to follow the money;

<1577> Jones: [FOI, temperature data] Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden. I’ve discussed this with the main funder (US Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.

Or this one which is actually close to the truth especially as we are over a decade now into a cooling trend;

Wils: What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably […]

And this one hits the nail on the head;

<5131> Shukla/IGES: [“Future of the IPCC”, 2008] It is inconceivable that policymakers will be willing to make billion-and trillion-dollar decisions for adaptation to the projected regional climate change based on models that do not even describe and simulate the processes that are the building blocks of climate variability.

Well they did, and that knowingly!

Should we expect the climate communists at the ALP, Gillard, Brown and their comrades to put the brakes on a carbon tax now the whole global warming fraud has been blown to bits – again! Nup, Gillard will continue to trample Australia’s democracy till it’s totally dead in the mud. Socialist Gillard wants her way and nothing not even the sacred will of the Australian people wont stop her let alone exposure of fraudulent global warming climate change junk science (Gillard has refused to listen so far).

How about this clanger from today’s paper;

SWISS banking giant UBS says the European Union’s emissions trading scheme has cost the continent’s consumers $287 billion for “almost zero impact” on cutting carbon emissions, and has warned that the EU’s carbon pricing market is on the verge of a crash next year“.

Gillard’s carbon tax will do the same. We already know that with Gillard’s carbon tax Australia wont reduce global temps, wont reduce emissions, will fund the UN’s opulence, will impoverish Australians, will cause fuel poverty and cold related deaths to skyrocket. Unabated Gillard’s Gulag against Australia continues. The ALP definitely are the most un Australian party ever. Just like the socialists ruined Spain look at how the socialist ALP are ruining Australia.

As one of the emails warn;

<3066> Thorne: I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.

He guessed right. The guillotine is about to fall. The climate criminals have deceived and robbed the world and now deserve to be jailed. Oh and it’s a bit late for this;

Phil, thanks for your thoughts – guarantee there will be no dirty laundry in the open. <2095> Steig:

The Global Warming loons ; Worse than we thought ; The Eurorich are still spending big ; How politics manufactured the man made global warming agenda ;

Pic via Soylent Green – a parody of the typical leftist abuse

Oh and the Church has well and truly been deceived;

My work is as Director of the national centre for climate change research, a job which requires me to translate my Christian belief about stewardship of God’s planet into research and action. <3653> Hulme:

Oh and dont forget;

<4141> Minns/Tyndall Centre:

In my experience, global warming freezing is already a bit of a public relations problem with the media


I agree with Nick that climate change might be a better labelling than global warming

And finally some common sense;

No one can really forecast weather, much less climate, at this point’

Warm has always been better than Cold for humanity. Think about it.

Filed under: Governance, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Minority government committment is to a foreign power & not to Australians

On the Australian Government website, under the title of a ‘message from the PM’, Gillard makes the astonishing claim that “Commitment to the United Nations is one of the three pillars of Australia’s foreign policy“. The Age reports;

GREENS leader Bob Brown – whose party assumes sole balance of power in the Senate tomorrow – wants Australia to join an international push for a global parliament“.

Yet the UN is not democratic, those in positions of power are not voted there by the public and it’s policies are not voted on by the Australian people.

Yet the constitution states that any Federal politician is illegible to stand for or remain in federal office if;

(i) Is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power:

Gillard, Brown, Rudd all acknowledge allegiance to the UN. Does the UN qualify as a foreign power?

interpretation of ‘ foreign power (p7)’ in both limbs of s 44(i) appears to be any polity or state recognised under international law other than the Commonwealth of Australia“.


Subsection 44(i) expresses the principle that members of parliament must have a clear and undivided loyalty to Australia and must not be subject to the influence of foreign governments“.

The UN is a polity though not a state it now calls countries states of its own power.

pol·i·ty [pol-i-tee] 

noun, plural -ties.

1. particular form or system of government: civil polity; ecclesiastical polity.
2.the condition of being constituted as a state or other organized community or body: The polity of ancient Athens became a standard for later governments.
3.government or administrative regulation: The colonists demanded independence in matters of internal polity.
4.a state or other organized community or body.
The UN is a system of government both in definition and action. The UN is an organised committee and body. The UN has government and administrative regulation. The UN classifies itself as a GGO – Global Governance Organisation. Governance = government and is now calling countries States – as though they now have deference to it.

The Australia Act in 1986 transforming Australia into a sovereign independent nation even made the UK and the countries of the commonwealth a foreign power.

Gillard and her UN feigning associates have no qualms acknowledging publicly their allegiance, by their words and actions in implementing foreign UN policy without the consent of Australian people. This clearly shows obedience and adherence to the UN. Both Gillard and Rudd seek the rights and privileges of the UN both wanting a seat on global governance – like Clinton, Blair, Clarke and the other ex national leaders of other countries.

It has to be asked what mandate does Gillard and her UN cronies have to implement what they said they wouldn’t. Gillard has become an imperial Prime Minister who instead of representing Australian constituents increasingly acts independently of the Australian people & Australian democracy at home and abroad instead governing and ruling Australia for the UN..

The constitution clearly says allegiance to a foreign power makes a federal politician ineligible for office. When the rights of all Australians are subjugated to the direction and empowerment of the UN then the PM, Bob Brown and all the global governance elitists have breached the constitution and are no longer legally fit or eligible for office and should be removed from office immediately..

Foreign Allegiance – grounds for parliamentary disqualification

It has to be stated that when most do not believe in the green fairytale of global warming, that the globe hasn’t warmed for over a decade, that many have exposed the global warming lie as simply a cover for climate communism – using the climate as a cover to bring in a socialist global redistribution of wealth, and that the whole global warming fraud is a fabrication that has it’s origins in the UN, that the biggest financial beneficiary of the global warming scare will be the UN that how could Gillard, or the ALP or the Greens in any way support this destructive and fraudulent action against Australians.

Furthermore the Act of Settlement 1701 (Imp) which disqualified those born outside the Kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland and the Dominions from holding office in the Privy Council or the Parliament, and from holding any office of trust under the Crown. Gillard was not born in Australia and has not been transparent or forthcoming to prove she legally renounced her citizenship from her country of birth (Wales) prior to becoming a federal politician.

Under article 61 of Magna Carta 1215 (the founding document of our Constitution) we have a right to enter into lawful rebellion if we feel we are being governed unjustly. Contrary to common belief our Sovereign and her government are only there to govern us and not to rule us and this must be done within the constraint of our Common Law and the freedoms asserted to us by such Law, nothing can become law in this country if it falls outside of this simple constraint.

Meanwhile the global warming fraud is exposed by nothing other than the climate; Judith Curry notes that so far we have had ; “a 12-year pause in rises in surface air and sea surface temperatures, and a nine-year pause in rises of ocean heat content“. But don’t let reality stop this treasonous minority government push ahead with the global warming fraud!

Filed under: Governance, , , ,

Work from home

Join 3,411 other followers

TWAWKI Twitter

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.


  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Story archives


%d bloggers like this: