The governments of nearly all countries of the world are in a panic about Climate Change.

It is the great cause of our time. In two decades a huge new industry has been created, with attendant bureaucracies and regulators, to spread the message that catastrophe approaches.

People are on the whole in slightly less of a panic than governments, their day to day experience of climate change being generally more subtle and ambivalent than the flood of messages from the media insisting that changes are happening, that they are dramatic and are accelerating towards disaster.

Changes are certainly happening economically, not to mention socially and politically. New taxes, restructuring of energy supply, new departments of regulation and compliance with new rules and restrictions. With serious costs and consequences for household and national economies.

By what authority?

If we are going to shut down energy generation, turn the lights out and sabotage our economy, supposedly to avert  greater troubles, then might we not ask how do we know whether these actions will fix the supposed problem?

Where’s the due diligence?

Who says it’s all about carbon (dioxide)?

The IPCC.  All hail.

Just imagine if the IPCC were not continued to be showered with honours, awards, money and reverence; if its authority were tarnished and the whole issue was a scam. What would the judgement of history be on this time when so much was changed so quickly in ways that look completely ludicrous unless we accept that drastically reducing carbon (dioxide) emissions is; 1. possible 2. going to fix the problem.

If the temperature is rising (question 1), will turning the lights out in some places (but not others) stop it from rising (question 2)?

Those who say the science is all settled are accepting the IPCC story without question and aren’t reading enough.

The IPCC was established by the UN in 1988 as a political organization to produce material to help persuade the governments of nations to act on climate change. Not a scientific organization; a political organization. Its early work was to produce material to help persuade political leaders to sign up to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ( UNFCCC ), an organization with the express purpose of obtaining an international treaty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 154 nations signed on to the UNFCCC agreement at the 1992 Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro that emissions were dangerous, which led onto the Kyoto agreement to commit to reducing them.

IPCC chairman Pachauri has stated that the main purpose of the IPCC remains in assisting the UNFCCC in furthering its aims. It selects, commissions, edits and publishes, with commentary, scientific works on the basis of how useful they will be to the cause. We are told that the IPCC’s standards of scientific rigour, independence, accuracy, fact checking, etc. are irreproachable. Not true. IPCC reports represent a consensus view of the majority of the world’s climate scientists. Not true.

The IPCC is run not by scientists but by a 31 – person directorate of civil servants, academics, bureaucrats and politicians, most of whom have direct links with activist groups, especially WWF, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace. They are pushing a green barrow and their claims of independence do not stand the slightest scrutiny. They break all the rules and ignore damning condemnation from even government enquiries because the Western media are so fawning in their support of the IPCC’s great and noble cause that they have been getting away with anything.

The hockey stick graph of temperature records, popularized especially by Al Gore, is a lie.

The IPCC has claimed that science says that temperature increases will increase the incidence of malaria, increase incidence and severity of tropical hurricanes / cyclones, and that the Himalaya’s glaciers will melt within 50 years. In each of these cases the real scientists with authority in those fields, who repudiated the IPCC’s predictions and tried to raise concerns about the IPCC’s fraudulent procedures, were excluded from the process of producing the IPCC’s reports.

The IPCC is a shonk, a green clique basking in wealth and influence heaped upon it by a gullible world political community and displaying alarming tendencies towards totalitarian control by preventing debate and prohibiting or ignoring dissent or any questioning of its structure or procedures.

We have been conned.

I defy anyone to read any of the following and then defend the idea that the IPCC has or has ever had any scientific credibility.

Donna Laframboise "The Delinquent Adolescent Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Scientist"

Garth Paltridge "The Climate Caper"

Robert Carter "Climate; The Counter Consensus"

Christopher Booker "The Real Climate Change Catastrophe"

Ian Plimer "Heaven + Earth"

A.W. Montford "The Hockey Stick Illusion"




Following are links to two articles about the leak of the IPCC SREX Summary for policymakers presenting key findings from the Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaption. 18 November 2011.


It will be very interesting to see how the IPCC handles the publication of this document. Letting it stand would be to admit that their position on the disasters looming from  man made climate change is nothing but a political fabrication.  Sanitising the report by removing the key give - away paragraphs would prove that their methods are dishonest and their reports are nothing but political fabrications. They are stuffed either way.

Except if they ignore the whole thing and our media continue to fail to apply normal investigative standards to their behaviour. They might get away with it for a while longer, but maybe the tide is turning on the greatest mass delusion in human history.