Peter Bromhead: Anthropogenic global warming issues - Opinion - NZ Herald News

Unlike New Zealanders - who appear more malleable when it comes to accepting vaporous concepts - Australians appear sceptical about their Government's proposals to hijack what many believe is an expensive fiction.

Possibly the reason Aussies don't buy into carbon tax is because they have all read their fellow countryman's admirably comprehensive book, Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science, by Professor Ian Plimer.

This volume, with thousands of scientific references on every aspect of climate change - through the history of the planet - is a must-read for those bewildered by climate contradictions.

Doing Advance Work: Climate industry genius Joe Romm starts SunSpotGate, joins ClimateGate, channels Richard Nixon and famous 18 minute gap

If warmists said sun spots affected climate they might be found floating near the Maldives. ClimateGate figure KevinTrenberth does say sun spots affect climate in an email to Joe Romm which Romm publishes, then deletes. You're supposed to blame the American middle class for global warming (mostly) and ridicule anyone who says sun spots effect climate. A Tom Nelson reader noticed the sun spot reference and its subsequent disappearance from Joe Romm's post

Rise of the 1st Law Deniers « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

So, we continue to be treated to news articles (e.g. here, and here.) quoting esteemed scientists who claim to have found problems with our paper published in Remote Sensing, which shows huge discrepancies between the real, measured climate system and the virtual climate system imagined by U.N.-affilliated climate modelers and George Soros-affiliated pundits (James Hansen, Joe Romm, et al.)

Their objections verge on the bizarre, and so I have to wonder whether any of them actually read our paper. I eagerly await their published papers which show any errors in our analysis.
...the dirty little secret is that there is still no way to test those models for their warming predictions. And as long as the modelers insist on using short term climate variability to “validate” the long term warming in their models, I will continue to use that same short term variability to show how the modelers might well be fooling themselves into believing in positive feedback. And without net positive feedback, manmade global warming becomes for all practical purposes a non-issue. (e.g., negative cloud feedback could more than cancel out any positive feedback in the climate system).

If I’m a “denier” of the theory of dangerous anthropogenic climate change, so be it. But as a scientist I’d rather deny that theory than deny the 1st Law of Thermodynamics.