Monday, May 2, 2016

Rudeness Masqarading as Leadership is Obama's Swan Song !

David Cameron has apparently decided the Left is the preferred place to be in future. Any British PM worth his salt would have punched Obama’s lights out for threatening Poms with “going to the end of the queue” if they did not vote to stay in the EU.... Extraordinary!

Fancy a bloke who has stuffed everything he has touched telling Europe how to suck eggs... and it’s possible the Poms, because of his arrogance and in the face of Continental Europe’s hordes of illegal immigrants salted with ISIS terrorists, will now vote the other way.

The move to rid the world of sovereign borders to make way for a new world order is an ambition of the loony Left, but the Left never learns, even when its dreams become nightmares. Take for example
Hollande and terrorism, Merkel and illegal immigration, Obama and regime change, Gillard and spending, Shorten and negative gearing, Turnbull and treachery, yet the Left never wavers and stands steadfast in its resolve no matter what the damage.
Angela Merkel's Germany is now being sued by hordes of illegals for not providing assistance quickly enough.
Bloody mindedness or ideological commitment, who cares? It’s wrong! I recall like yesterday the new dawn of a European Economic Community (EEC) in 1973. At the time it all made sense, trade wise, but 20 years later its name was changed from the “EEC” to the “European Union” with a communal currency and Brussels given extensive new powers. That was just the start of the decline.

Paedophile and close friend of Jimmy Savile, PM Sir Edward Heath, (both below) produced a 1971 White Paper on EEC entry which had promised no “erosion of essential national sovereignty”. Unfortunately European law still over-rides British law, and plenty more of the over-riding is still on the way from Brussels, not to mention the disaster of borderless entry and exit between States with one “European” passport and one currency.

UK media at the time spoke as one in agreement with entry, but it slowly came apart at the seams for Britain as various smaller economies took advantage of the one currency. The UK retained its domestic Sterling but still suffered from a ridiculous single currency when it came to disparate State economies selfishly looking to enjoy the security of Brussels.

The EEC was a grand idea with many problems before it morphed into the EU, the extent of that folly quickly became evident. The EU referendum that Cameron promised is on a knife edge with a “stay in” vote becoming more likely by the day, despite Obama’s threats.

British taxpayers are slugged £1billion per month in dues to Brussels and the bill was recently increased by another £1.7billion but never mind, Brussels is currently “rebating” Cameron to pay for the “stay-in” campaign.

Obama is light-headed over security matters in any forum and as a member of NATO the US is exposed to 28 independent European member States, many of whom are also locked into the EU with terrorism supporter Turkey knocking on the door with provisional EU membership and a demand for a visa waiver.
Bloody hell, aren’t there enough ISIS operatives already transiting through Turkey?
Turkey’s Erdogan has threatened to renege on a landmark agreement to curb illegal migration to the European Union if it isn’t granted visa-free travel to Europe for Turkey's 78 million citizens by this year. If Ankara gets what it wants as the only Islamic State in the EU it would allow more millions of illegal ''migrants” from Africa, Asia and the Middle-East to flow through Turkey into Europe.

"You talk about democracy, freedom and the rule of law.... For us, these words have absolutely no value any longer”, said Erdogan.
If Obama forgives the Saudis for organising 9/11 then the Turks should be able to shoot more of Putin’s air force down with complete impunity and be privy to a future US Administration’s  war plans.

Is it any wonder North Korea can thumb its nose at the US, Iran can break a nuclear agreement and Russia can buzz US warships? Obama’s response is more sanctions... sanctions that only hurt innocent civilians.
The Way I See It.....Obama’s pacifism is breeding another world war. 
His answer is to wedge Putin into a corner with the corrupt Poroshenko of Ukraine and NATO members to its West and the US, forty mile across the Bering Strait, to its East. Fortunately Putin can run rings around Obama where tactics are concerned.

          The end of the Obama era can’t come quickly enough.

Here are 13 Examples of Obama's Jew Hatred !

For someone whose feelings “are hurt” by charges of anti-Semitism, Barack Obama has sure surrounded himself with Jew-haters, honored anti-Semites, and declared policies that can be seen as anti-Jewish. Dozens of examples exist. For the sake of brevity, 13 are listed below.

  1. Hiring anti-Semites like General Merrel McPeak. The 2008 Obama for President Co-Chair has an impressive record of blaming American foreign policy on the “Jewish Lobby.” When asked during an interview why there’s no peace in the Middle East and he said, “In New York City. we have a large vote — vote, here in favor of Israel. And no politician wants to run against it.”
  2. Hiring anti-Semite Zbigniew Brzezinski who warned about the power of the pro-Israel lobby buying congress.
  3. Appointing anti-Semite Chas Freeman who blamed his resignation on the evil Israel lobby (a nicer way of saying Jewish lobby).
  4. First Presidential Medal of Freedom honourees were anti-Semites Bishop Desmond Tutu and Mary Robinson. The nicest thing Bishop Desmond Tutu ever said about Jews was “People are scared in this country [the US], to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful.” Also that, “the Jews thought they had a monopoly on God.”
  5. Mary Robinson presided over the “World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,” which turned into a non-stop hate-fest against Jews and Israel. The conference was so anti-Semitic that then Secretary of State Colin Powell walked out.
  6. Buddy and tax evader, Al Sharpton (photo right) led the anti-Semitic pogrom in Crown Heights and incited the anti-Semitic fire bombing of Freddy’s Fashion Mart in Harlem.
  7. Advisor Valerie Jarrett gave the keynote address at an anti-Semitic ISNA conference, which included discussions on how key Obama aides are “Israeli,” proving Jews “have control of the world,” or how the Holocaust is punishment of Jews for being “serially disobedient to Allah.”
  8. His second Department of Defense appointee Chuck Hagel believes in the nefarious “world wide Jewish conspiracy.” Hagel was once quoted saying, “The political reality is that… the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here.”
  9. After Islamists attacked a Kosher supermarket in Paris one year ago, Obama first insisted it was a random act and not an anti-Semitic act.
  10. Obama unilaterally broke a pre-existing deal with Israel over its housing policy.
  11. Last Friday presented another example of this after the U.S. State Department condemned Israel for allowing homes to be built for Jews to live in that were located west of the Jordan River.
  12. Obama has repeatedly criticized Israel for allowing Jews to purchase homes (with real money) in East Jerusalem. Yet, Obama have not identified any other location around the world where he believes certain people should not be allowed to legally purchase homes with real money—except for Jews.
  13. On a July 31, last year, phone call Obama repeatedly stated that opponents of the Iran deal came from the same “array of forces that got us into the Iraq war,” namely, Jews. Lee Rosenberg of AIPAC questioned Obama's  statement, comparing people who object to the Iran deal to those who supported the invasion of Iraq, that many anti-Semites falsely claim the Jews pushed Bush into invading Iraq. Who can forget former prime minister Ariel Sharon’s strong opposition. Sharon urged Bush not to invade Iraq, arguing correctly that if Saddam were removed, “Iran, a far more dangerous player, will be rid of its principal enemy and free to pursue its ambitions of regional hegemony.”
The Way I See It......there may be other reasons why Barack Obama surrounded himself with people who make anti-Semitic statements or lead anti-Semitic pogroms, honour people with a history of anti-Semitism, or make policy decisions that can easily be interpreted as anti-Semitic. Any one or two of the above could reasonably be ignored. Whether one believes Obama is an anti-Semite or not it, what cannot be argued against– is that far more than a “smidgen” of evidence exists revealing that this president has an issue with Jews.

Sunday, May 1, 2016

Lead Developer Of HPV Vaccines Comes Clean, Warns Parents It’s All A Giant Deadly Scam

Dr. Diane Harper was the lead researcher in the development of the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccines, Gardasil™ and Cervarix™.  She is now the latest in a long string of experts who are pressing the red alert button on the devastating consequences and irrelevancy of these vaccines.

Dr. Harper made her surprising confession at the 4th International Conference on Vaccination which took place in Virginia. Her speech, which was originally intended to promote the benefits of the vaccines, took a 180-degree turn when she chose instead to clean her conscience about the deadly vaccines so she “could sleep at night”.

Here's a case in point:  Madelyne, 20, and her friend Olivia, 19, are suing Merck, the makers of Gardasil, saying the vaccine caused their ovaries to stop producing eggs, a condition known as premature ovarian failure.
''We were robbed of our womanhood,'' Madelyne says. ''And now, wherever I go, and when I see a pregnant lady I know is not an option for me. It leaves me devastated!''

Dr. Harper explained in her presentation that the cervical cancer risk in the U.S. is already extremely low, and that vaccinations are unlikely to have any effect upon the rate of cervical cancer in the United States. In fact, 70% of all HPV infections resolve themselves without treatment in a year, and the number rises to well over 90% in two years. Harper also mentioned the safety angle. All trials of the vaccines were done on children aged 15 and above, despite them currently being marketed for 9-year-olds.

So far, 15,037 girls have reported adverse side effects from Gardasil™ alone to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and this number only reflects parents who underwent the hurdles required for reporting adverse reactions. At the time of writing, 44 girls are officially known to have died from these vaccines. Parents are usually not made aware of the risks. Dr. Harper claimed that she was speaking out, so that she might finally be able to sleep at night. She wonders how Ian Frazer, the vaccine's co-inventor can sleep at night knowing that his misguided and unnecessary creation is hurting children worldwide..

Although these two vaccines are marketed as protection against cervical cancer, this claim is purely hypothetical. In 2009, reports of adverse Gardasil reactions, Frazer said "Apart from a very,  rare instance where you get an allergic reaction from the vaccine, which is about one in a million, there is nothing else that can be directly attributable to the vaccine." He was obviously in denial then, and still is! Ian Frazer is one of the "most trusted" Australians, and some critics have accused Gardasil's advocates of exploiting patriotism to promote its rapid Australian release. (Australia's besotted government had the world's most generous coverage for the drug, though it is the nation with the lowest cervical cancer mortality.)[ 

Studies have proven “there is no demonstrated relationship between the condition being vaccinated for and the rare cancers that the vaccine might prevent, but it is marketed to do that nonetheless. In fact, there is no actual evidence that the vaccine can prevent any cancer. From the manufacturers own admissions, the vaccine only works on 4 strains out of 40 for a specific venereal disease that dies on its own in a relatively short period.”

So often we hear about how the benefits of vaccines “outweigh the risks” of disease, but for parents dealing with a child who has been severely vaccine injured, this statement can be seen as a menace to their unimaginable pain.

The HPV vaccines (Gardasil and Cervarix) are among the most controversial of the current vaccine schedule. The source of this controversy is the alarming number of adverse reactions being reported, such as the one seen in the video below.

While defenders of HPV vaccines commonly argue that no link can be clearly defined between  the number of adverse reactions reported to VAERS and the Gardasil/Cervarix vaccine, many remain unconvinced of its innocence, especially when an otherwise healthy child begins exhibiting injury symptoms immediately after receiving the vaccine.

The Way I See It.....the medical establishment is not doing its due diligence in explaining all of the risks involved with vaccinations? Are parents making truly informed decisions about vaccines? Surely every parent should be going into such a decision armed with as much knowledge of the potential outcomes as possible, yet time and time again, especially with regard to HPV vaccines, parents are left to deal with the unfortunate repercussions of being uninformed.

The mother of this vaccine injured child has decided to showcase her challenges to the public, with hopes that some will see exactly what it means to deal with the consequences of an uninformed medical decision. To follow her story, see this link to her Facebook page.

Coral in the Warmer Waters of the Red Sea are Thriving !

The Australian Government’s Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority’s web site claims if conditions (sea temperatures) don't improve within weeks, the corals will eventually starve and die. The website claims coral bleaching “is not always fatal”, but has been one of the main causes of coral death... blah blah blah etc.

The truth is that the only pollution the GBR has seen lately is the inane bullshit coming from an endless line of marine biology graduates. Without a contrived disaster (global warming) none would have a job... our reef system is as vibrant as it has always been.

But marine biology is a favourite course of our intelligence challenged university students. Why
wouldn’t it be? Who wouldn’t prefer floating around the reefs on the back of a turtle measuring corals to a desk job and living off of generous government grants.

The trouble is that there are now too many permanent uni holiday makers on the market and secondly, there is not a damned thing wrong with our reefs or any other of the world’s reefs, so in truth there isn’t a proper job for any of them.

The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change predicts that by 2035 the average sea surface temperature will be warmer than any previously recorded, and by 2100 sea temperatures off north-eastern Australia could be at least 2.5 degrees Celsius warmer than the present average.

The latest claim is that global warming has caused cyclones that are also destroying our reef system... what a load of frog shit! Cyclones are as important to reefs’ welfare as bushfires are to the bush where mounting dead and old weakened strains of growth are eliminated to make way for new growth. That’s how things work! And besides the latest news says we've only had 3 cyclones this season the lowest in decades....go figure!

Old growth corals eventually become the pristine white sands of coral beaches. So much for cyclones, now for sea temperatures. Dodgy Green measuring suggests a sea temperature rise of one half of one degree Celsius since 1910. Really?
So this drastic warming of half of one degree over a century is killing our coral?
The Dead Sea and the Red Sea are already up to 10 degrees Celsius warmer than our Reef which has temps as low as 14 C during winter. Yet the Dead and Red Seas of the Middle East, with average temperatures of 30 C, have equally magnificent coral reefs (Red Sea pictured). How can these corals exist in water so hot compared to ours?

It seems that heat and cyclones encourage reefs and their inhabitants to evolve to even greater beauty.

Not that I would believe one thing environmental groups and the UN’s IPCC have said about our climate because everything they have suggested so far has been plainly wrong!
This “apocalyptic” climate change is nothing more than business as usual, or have we already forgotten the Y2K bug and the ozone layer scams.
The Way I See It.....the truth is the plethora of marine biologists pouring out of our Lefty universities need to concoct “temperature” disasters or they simply won’t have a job.

In the meantime battling Aussies are saving up for a Barrier Reef holiday with the kids to show them what has been evolving, and will continue to evolve, for the next million years.

What’s the bet that the snorkel, mask and flippers academics will have discovered a cooling threat by end of this century?  See my previous posting about that eventuality.

Sunday, April 24, 2016

Barack Obama is a Moral Coward and an Asskisser to Totalitarns !

Last December, President Obama  decided to greet Pope Francis with transgendered activists, the first gay Episcopal Bishop who is now already divorced, and activist Catholic nuns. The Vatican was not happy about it and has pushed back.
On the eve of Pope Francis’s arrival in the U.S., the Vatican has taken offense at the Obama administration’s decision to invite to the pope’s welcome ceremony transgender activists, the first openly gay Episcopal bishop and an activist nun who leads a group
criticized by the Vatican for its silence on abortion and euthanasia.
The Obama Administration was no doubt thrilled to make a show of it and push a secularist, anti-Catholic agenda while embarrassing Pope Francis and putting the Pope in an awkward political position.
According to a senior Vatican official, the Holy See worried that any photos of the pope with these guests at the White House welcoming ceremony could be interpreted as an endorsement of their activities.
But Barack Obama would never do this if the Pope was a major trading partner, had a military, or was a totalitarian despot who snuffed out human rights activists.

This was, after all, the President of the United States who sent the Dalai Lama out the back door with the trash so as not to offend the Chinese.

This is the President who turned his back on the Iranian Green Revolution so he could do business with Iran’s totalitarian dictators.

The Chinese Premier is coming for a state visit. What are the odds that the President will greet him with Tibetan dissidents and Taiwanese freedom protestors. What are the odds there will be any there who fled after Tiananmen? I put the odds and slightly less than zero.

Then, of course, there are the Cubans. The President did nothing to work to improve the situation of Cuban human rights activists in jail. He turned a blind eye to them while trying to improve relations with that totalitarian regime. He even had fun watching a baseball game with Raoul and doing the ''Wave''.

But the Pope? Oh, we can greet the Pope with transgendered activists, gay rights activists, and Catholics who disagree with the Pope on Catholic doctrine. That’s really standing up to power and speaking truth!!

The Way I See It.......President Obama, in fact, is only willing to stand up and speak truth when it costs him nothing. He’s never met a totalitarian he wasn’t willing to kneel in front of.

UK “Equalities” Chief Admits He Was Wrong, Muslims Won’t Assimilate !

Screen Shot 2015-06-30 at 12.35.11 PM

      Screen Shot 2016-04-10 at 3.23.58 PM

      By Pamela Geller, Breitbart London, April 10, 2016:

In one of the most extraordinary admissions of defeat in modern times, Trevor Phillips, the former chief of Britain’s Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), has admitted that the path that Britain has been on for years is a catastrophic failure. Muslims won’t assimilate and become loyal Britons.

Phillips wrote: “For a long time, I too thought that Europe’s Muslims would become like
previous waves of migrants, gradually abandoning their ancestral ways, wearing their religious and cultural baggage lightly, and gradually blending into Britain’s diverse identity landscape. I should have known better.” Instead, he wrote, Muslims are creating “nations within nations” in the West.
It is astonishing that any member of the ruling elite would admit defeat and state what is painfully obvious to any rational human being who for the last few years has been watching the disintegration of the Western mores and law in the wake of Muslim immigration.
Muslims are the only immigrant group that comes to Western countries with a ready-made model of society and government (sharia) which they believe to be superior to what we have here, and they work to institute it.
The question is, now that Phillips has spoken up and stated the truth, what will the UK do now? Continue to jail those who speak critically of jihad and sharia? Or will the UK begin shutting down mosques that incite Muslims to wage jihad?
Will it prohibit hate preachers from speaking on UK college campuses, and instead invite my colleagues? Will Muslim immigration from jihad nations be halted? Will sharia courts be shut down?
This admission of defeat is all the more remarkable coming from Phillips, who popularized the term “Islamophobia” in Britain. As I explained in my book Stop the Islamization of America, the very word is a fictional construct. It was popularized deliberately by a Muslim Brotherhood front organization, the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT).
Abdur Rahman Muhammad, a member of the IIIT who has renounced the group in disgust,
was an eyewitness to the development of the word. “This loathsome term,” he wrote, “is nothing more then I thought terminating cliché conceived in the bowels of Muslim thing tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.”
The term “Islamophobia” was designed specifically for the Western mindset of liberal white guilt, stealing the “civil rights” narrative from black Americans and mining the “oppression” of Native Americans, even throwing in the spectre of the Japanese internment camps during World War II.
These are the clubs Islamic supremacists in the West use to beat anyone who dares to speak out or push back against the encroaching sharia, the appeasement of Islamic supremacists and their demands in the secular marketplace, and the restriction of free speech. It was why I was banned from the UK, which is acting like a de facto Islamic state.
In reality, “Islamophobia” is nothing more than a term that Islamic supremacists use to enforce the Islamic blasphemy laws in the West: in Islamic law, to defame or insult Muhammad or Islam is blasphemy, and in many Muslim countries it’s punishable by death. That is why devout Muslims tried to slaughter all of us in Garland, Texas last May, at our Muhammad art exhibit in the defence of the freedom of speech.
The handful of us who have, for years, predicted and warned of the disastrous consequences of large-scale Muslim immigration have been smeared, defamed, and blacklisted — our reputations destroyed. And now once again we have been shown to have been right all along.
Phillips made his statement after a poll showed, according to Breitbart London:
  • One in five Muslims in Britain never enter a non-Muslim house;
  • 39 per cent of Muslims, male and female, say a woman should always obey her husband;
  • 31 per cent of British Muslims support the right of a man to have more than one wife;
  • 52 per cent of Muslims did not believe that homosexuality should be legal;
  • 23 per cent of Muslims support the introduction of sharia law rather than the laws laid down by parliament.
These numbers are consistent with numerous polls that have been conducted over the past decade. It’s not just the UK. According to a recent poll, 58% of Muslims in the United States reject First Amendment criticism of Islam as a right. 46% want blasphemy punished, 12% want blasphemers killed.
Muslims believe that sharia law is divine and therefore supersedes all national, “manmade” laws.
Phillips admits: “Liberal opinion in Britain has, for more than two decades, maintained that most Muslims are just like everyone else''… Britain desperately wants to think of its Muslims as versions of the Great British Bake Off winner Nadiya Hussain, or the cheeky-chappie athlete Mo Farah. But thanks to the most detailed and comprehensive survey of British Muslim opinion yet conducted, we now know that just isn’t how it is.
This is a huge change for him. He commissioned “the Runnymede report” on Islamophobia” in 1997, making the term mainstream. Now he says: “Twenty years ago… I published the report titled Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, we thought that the real risk of the arrival of new communities was discrimination against Muslims. Our 1996 survey of recent incidents showed that there was plenty of it around. But we got almost everything else wrong.”
They got that wrong, too. How many times have we seen a supposed act of “Islamophobia” turn out to have been committed by Muslims? Phillips’ new realism may bring some sanity back to Britain regarding Muslim immigration, and even strengthen the campaigns of U.S. presidential candidates who have called for a halt to that immigration on national security grounds – including that of Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
Cruz was the only Presidential candidate who stood up for us in the wake of the Garland jihad attack.This is because we are facing the same problem in the U.S., where some of our most respected Muslim leaders have openly stated they want Islamic rule here. These aren’t people on the fringe. These men are mainstream traitors, and are or have been the leaders of the key Muslim organizations in the U.S.:
  • Muzammil Siddiqi, chairman of both the Fiqh Council of North America and the North American Islamic Trust: “As Muslims, we should participate in the system to safeguard our interests and try to bring gradual change, (but) we must not forget that Allah’s rules have to be established in all lands, and all our efforts should lead to that direction.”
  • Omar Ahmad, co-founder and long-time Board chairman of the Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations: “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Quran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”
  • CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper: “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.”
  • Siraj Wahhaj of the Muslim Alliance in North America: “In time, this so-called democracy will crumble, and there will be nothing. And the only thing that will remain will be Islam.”
  • Zaid Shakir of Zaytuna College in Berkeley, Calif.: “If we put a nationwide infrastructure in place and marshalled our resources, we’d take over this country in a very short time. . . . What a great victory it will be for Islam to have this country in the fold and ranks of the Muslims.”
Phillips says: “Some of my journalist friends imagine that, with time, the Muslims will grow out of it. They won’t.” That’s right. So what is he going to do about the Islamic threat?
Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of and author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Follow her on Twitter here. Like her on Facebook here.

Saturday, April 23, 2016

It Bears Repeating: Earth Will Start Cooling Down in 2017 !

With the signing today of the Paris Climate Agreement at the United Nations by 172 countries the hoodwinking by climate scientists of so many ignorant politicians to accept man-made global warming is now a fait accomplis.

However, ONE of the world's leading climate change experts claims to have discovered mathematical anomalies which effectively 'disprove' global warming.

Dr David Evans, a former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office, says global warming predictions have been vastly exaggerated in error.

The academic, from Perth, Australia, who has passed six degrees in applied mathematics, has analysed complex mathematical assumptions widely used to predict climate change and is predicting world temperature will stagnate until 2017 before cooling, with a 'mini ice age' by 2030.

He says fundamental flaws in how future temperatures may rise have been included in the 'standard models' and this has led to inflated mathematical - and therefore temperature - predictions.

He said: "There is an intellectual stand-off in climate change. Skeptics point to empirical evidence that disagrees with the climate models.''

Yet the climate scientists insist that their calculations showing a high sensitivity to carbon dioxide are correct — because they use well-established physics, such as spectroscopy, radiation physics, and adiabatic lapse rates.

He said he "mapped out" the architecture of the climate models used and found, that while the physics was correct, it had been "applied wrongly".

He claims to have found two reasons for it being wrongly applied, the first being a vastly over estimated impact on our temperature from CO2. He said: "There is NO empirical evidence that rising levels of carbon dioxide will raise the temperature of the Earth’s surface as fast as the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts.''

"Yes, CO2 has an effect, but it’s about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is.
CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20% of the global warming in the last few decades”. He said the other problem was the predictions had no reflection on changes that have actually been recorded and never saw the current 18-year temperature stagnation we are now in.

“The model architecture was wrong,” he said.“Carbon dioxide causes only minor warming. The climate is largely driven by factors outside our control.''

"As such, the wind farms and solar panels are not just bad at reducing carbon dioxide — even if they did succeed in reducing carbon dioxide they’d be useless at cooling the planet. It is only four billion dollars a day worldwide, wasted."

Although he is convinced he is right, he fears it will not be taken on board by world governments.
“These findings here are unlikely to be popular with the establishment. The political obstacles are massive,” he said.

Dr Evans says historic global warming has been down to solar activity - a process called  “albedo modulation” - the waxing and waning of reflected radiation from the Sun. Between 2017 and 2021 he estimates a cooling of about 0.3C before the mini ice age in the 2030s.

His theory is unlikely to convince Julia Slingo, UK Met Office chief scientist, who fervently believes increased CO2 levels is the big "smoking gun evidence" for man made climate change.
She said: "Those levels have been rising systematically ever since the Industrial Revolution, and, in fact, have risen very rapidly over the last fifty years, so that the levels we now measure in the atmosphere are at least a third higher than they’ve been for at least 800,000 years. That’s not enough to prove that it’s human activities that are leading to that rise.''
She also argues oxygen levels in our atmosphere have declined for more than 50 years, again caused by burning fossil fuels. "There’s a complete story here, for which there seems to be no other explanation, really, than it is our activities and ways of generating energy that are causing our climate to change."

However, to counter such ''fervour'' an important truth dawns on CSIRO chief Larry Marshall after staff and activists revolt against his planned switch from researching global warming to figuring out
how to cope with it:
“I guess I had the realisation that the climate lobby is perhaps more powerful than the energy lobby was back in the ‘70s - and the politics of climate I think there’s a lot of emotion in this debate.
“In fact it almost sounds more like religion than science to me.”
True. but what conclusions do we then draw about his global warming scientists? Does a religious commitment to global warming make them less likely to accept or announce findings that cast doubt on their creed?

Marshall should go further and discuss how a “religious” belief in global warming theory conflicts with a scientist’s need to be objective. I'm waiting for the next press release.
The Way I See It.......There is actually no empirical evidence that rising levels of carbon dioxide will raise the temperature of the Earth’s surface as fast as the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts. It looks like faith will have to do.