Category Archives: John O’Sullivan

Political Greenpeace Loses Charity Status in Landmark Court Ruling

By: John O’Sullivan

In a landmark court ruling in New Zealand that will send tremors around the world, the once respected Greenpeace is stripped of its charity status.

High Court Judge, Justice Paul Heath made the groundbreaking decision today after overwhelming evidence was presented that proved that the organization’s illegal activities were motivated by zealous political advocacy and crossed the line of what charities are permitted to do.

In a story making headlines in the New Zealand Herald (May 10, 2011) climate skeptics around the world will now be consulting lawyers in their respective countries to assess whether similar legal challenges may be made against the disgraced former charity. Dr. Tim Ball, who is currently facing court proceedings from Greenpeace supporters in Canada, urged skeptics to “pursue this globally.”

Climate Courtroom Worm Has Turned

In the U.S and Britain environmentalist activists have for decades sought to influence policymakers by a swath of unlawful protests often involving criminal damage and trespass. Several prominent UN climatologists have long aligned themselves with and been apologists for the radical and unlawful acts of these environmentalists.

As a consequence of the shock New Zealand ruling Greenpeace’s political activities mean it will be de-registered as a charity and thus lose the prestige and tax advantages associated with that status.

NASA’s problematic climatologist, James Hansen, flew to London to be an ‘expert witness’ to testify in the defense of climate activists prosecuted for such crimes.

Hansen flew to the UK in the case of the “Kingsnorth Six”, who had climbed up E.ON’s coal plant. The six had used Greenpeace’s climate change defence – that their actions were designed to prevent immediate harm to human life and property from climate change – and were acquitted.

Judge Rules Greenpeace Acted Illegally

Justice Paul Heath’s decision was as the result of an appeal launched by Greenpeace after a 2010 ruling by the Charities Commission which found its promotion of “disarmament and peace” was political rather than educational. Greenpeace members were ruled to have acted illegally.

Justice Paul Heath pronounced:

“Non-violent, but potentially illegal activities (such as trespass), designed to put (in the eyes of Greenpeace) objectionable activities into the public spotlight were an independent object disqualifying it from registration as a charitable entity.”

Davey Salmon Greenpeace’s lawyer in the action was crestfallen at the failure of his argument that such political advocacy was acceptable in 21st century. Read more here.

Comments Off on Political Greenpeace Loses Charity Status in Landmark Court Ruling

Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Climate Disruption, CO2, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Greenpeace, John O'Sullivan, Legal

Climate Lawsuits Heading for Defeat Say Top Legal Experts

By: John O’Sullivan

Desperate greens file countless lawsuits in last gasp bid for climate regulations: experts, public and lawmakers unmoved.

May 2011 sees the Big Green litigation machine go into overdrive as it ignores Gallup Poll ratings showing Joe Public no longer believes it’s global warming propaganda. In a story that is going viral on the web, Matthew Brown (Associated Press) explains that, “The courtroom ploy was backed by activists looking for a legal soft spot to advance a cause that has stumbled in the face of stiff congressional opposition.”

In the United States environmentalists plummet new depths as gullible children are groomed to appear in courts to explore any legal loophole to squeeze through impose swinging climate regulations damaging to economic recovery. Meanwhile in Canada skeptic climatologist, Dr. Tim Ball rides a tide of popular support to fight back against well-funded climate doomsayer libel suits.

Greens Groom Kids with Crank Claims of Carbon Contamination

Matthew Brown’s report highlights how the idealism of children is cynically being exploited with this spate of lawsuits. Alec Loorz of Ventura, California, is one of many children indoctrinated into thinking our planet is doomed.

An Oregon-based nonprofit called Our Children’s Trust has been recruiting kids like Alec Loorz as plaintiffs for their speculative claims which are based on “common law” theories, not statutes adopted by state or federal lawmakers.

Loorz is an impressionable 16-year-old climate activist groomed as a plaintiff in one of the speculative U.S. cases. A worried Loorz said he latched onto the effort because he thought, “it would give us teeth, give us a bigger voice than just yelling and marching.”

Loorz was first groomed as an ‘eco-warrior’ at the tender age of 13 after seeing former Vice President Al Gore’s discredited movie, ‘Inconvenient Truth.’ A British High Court ruling in 2007 was that Gore’s film contained nine lies.The judge ruled that the film can only be shown to children with guidance notes to prevent political indoctrination. Sadly, Loorz’s green groomers omitted to pass on that vital piece of information.
Thus the deep-pockets of environmental ‘charities’ believed to be funding young activists, are still remorselessly insisting that human emissions of carbon dioxide that comprises less than 0.04 percent of the atmosphere, is a dangerous ‘poison.’ But to biologists the benign trace gas is merely plant food and has long been pumped into Loorz’s sodas to give that bubbly fizz.

Lawmakers Condemn Green’s Misuse of Precious Court Time

Many legal analysts predict that this latest ruse by climate extremists will clog up the court system in all 50 U.S. states. Such lawsuits are already being frowned upon from an unlikely quarter: the Obama administration.

Already, the U.S. Supreme Court has disapproved of such “nuisance cases.” Environmental lawyer, Steven G. Jones correctly echoed the voice of the judiciary, “[t]he Supreme Court has long recognized that there are cases that raise political questions that should be reserved for the political branches of government.” [1.]

In his excellent legal analysis, ‘Republican Lawmakers Join Obama Administration in Urging Supreme Court to Overrule GHG Nuisance Case,’ Jones highlights the fact that the Obama administration agreed with Republicans that the U.S. Supreme Court was correct to overturn an appellate ruling that would have allowed environmental plaintiffs to sue sources of greenhouse gases (GHGs) under tort law. Thus even this ultra-green President who tried and failed to get Congress to pass climate laws frowns upon this new and ill-thought out legal gambit.
Harvard Law School professor Jody Freeman agrees with Columbia University law professor Michael Gerrard are among a host of experts advising that these frivolous lawsuits won’t save a moribund green cause. Freeman doubts a law court could ever be an appropriate forum for the issue.

“I am generally skeptical the plaintiffs will succeed in the courts pressing for common-law remedies from judges,” Freeman said. Another expert, Hans von Spakovsky, attorney and a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), dismissed the lawsuits for being based on “a creative, made-up legal theory.”

However, to the far northwest in Vancouver, British Columbia, a far more compelling and ultimately decisive global warming legal battle is being fought in Canadian libel courts. Climatologist, Dr. Tim Ball and his legal team are confident they will deal their own fatal blow to two lawsuits filed by UN climate extremists, thus putting an end to any claims that man-made global warming has any scientific substance.

The omens are good, according to ‘Time’ magazine, which notes that Canadian voters, just like their U.S. cousins, have been voting down green policies in recent elections; so it will be hard to find any jury north or south of the 49th parallel eager to resurrect environmentalism’s lost cause.

[1.] Id. at 11 (citing Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 217 (1962) and Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267, 277 (2004)).

Source: John O’Sullivan


Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Climate Disruption, CO2, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, John O'Sullivan, Legal, Politics

Ten Physics Facts – Setting the Record Straight

Curious about some of the faux claims made by warmers and what the real deal is about them? Here’s something from Slaying the Sky that sets the record straight on 10 physics facts that some warmers like to twist to suit their vision of global warming.

This is a rebuttal based on Physics Trumps Right-Wing Ideology written by Mr. Puckerclust. Puckerclust begins his post thusly:

“Global warming deniers know as much about climate science as they do about brain surgery. Would you let them tell your doctor what to do about that tumor?

“Why do I–a professional physicist and lifetime member of the American Physical Society–accept the reality of human-caused global warming? Because I accept the following top-ten list of physics facts, which have never been disputed in the scientific literature. This is also why the American Physical Society of 47,000 physicists says “The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring”.”

Before we set the record straight about those ten supposed physics facts, let’s also set the record straight on some preliminary information that Mr Puckerclust would like us to believe.

(a) The APS statement on climate change was not drafted or confirmed by “47,000 physicists” of the APS, but by the APS council.

(b) Many members of the APS have criticized the statement, incl. Harold Lewis who resigned in protest. Lewis’ analysis of the motivations behind the APS council position on climate change is better than anything we could come up with.

(c) Even APS editor Jeffrey Marque had to make the public admission ”There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution.”
(d) Furthermore, even if there was “consensus” on AGW by APS or any other institution this wouldn’t make the theory valid unless Puckerclust is also willing to accept that the Sun had revolved around the Earth prior to 1543.
(e) The snide title of Puckerclust’s essay implies that those on the political left could not possibly dispute his opinions. That alone is far from the truth.
(f) By the way, nobody is denying that global warming occurred during the last decade of the last century, it’s just that the emissions of carbon dioxide have nothing to do with it.

Now for our point by point response, not just one, but all ten.

You can read the rebuttal to all 10 at the source below.

Source: Slaying the Skydragon

Comments Off on Ten Physics Facts – Setting the Record Straight

Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Climate Disruption, Climategate, CO2, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, John O'Sullivan, Science, Slaying the Sky Dragon

Debunking the Greenhouse Gas Theory in Three Simple Steps

By: John O’Sullivan

A group of international scientists find that carbon dioxide is a coolant, the calculations in the greenhouse gas theory are wrong and humans are not killing the planet.

It may have taken the Climategate controversy to prompt a growing band of specialist scientists to come forward and work together to help climatologists get themselves out of an almighty mess. But at last we know for sure that the doomsaying equations behind the man-made global warming new research shows the numbers were fudged, the physics was misapplied and group thinking perpetuated gross errors.

Yes, the greenhouse effect has now been proven to be a fabrication. That mythical concept called ‘back radiation’ whereby heat was supposed to be recycled in the atmosphere and worsened by the dreaded burning of fossil fuels is contradicted. In reality it’s now been shown that the atmosphere acts like a coolant of Earth’s surface, which, otherwise, would have a temperature of 121 Degrees Celsius, or 394 Kelvin (K).

A team of dedicated international experts, known as the ‘Slayers,’ all highly qualified in their respective fields, spent the past year deliberating over the deep-rooted errors in the calculations employed in the greenhouse gas theory. Their findings are devastating to all those who claim carbon dioxide and the ‘greenhouse effect’ heats our atmosphere.

The standard argument of a clique of climatologists associated with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is as follows:

  • A warm body (the earth) radiates heat to a cool body (the atmosphere)
  • The cool body “back-radiates” (IPCC term) heat to the warm body.
  • This process continues perpetually, with heat flowing round and round in a continuous cycle.
  • The result of this perpetual process is that the warm body becomes warmer.

This is the so-called greenhouse effect (GHE) examined closely by a team of professors of physics, mathematics, astrophysics, chemistry and biology who joined forces to put the numbers under a fresh microscope.

This group of 20+ specialist scientists has given the infant (and generalist) science of climatology a much-need shake up. Indeed, the ‘Slayers’ say a monumental paradigm shift is now very much under way.

Below, in simplified form, we examine in three parts how their brilliant analysis has eviscerated one of the most costly and mistaken theories of modern science, man-made global warming.

Part One: Coolant Carbon Dioxide

In a recent ground breaking paper Professor Nasif Nahle proved that carbon dioxide (CO2) actually works as a coolant when it interacts with water vapor in the atmosphere to induce the air temperature to cool not a warm.

Physicist, Joe Postma, in this epic debunk further describes the correct application of the laws of thermodynamics to address how the thermal capacity (or conductivity) works with the ‘coolant’ CO2. As Postma tells us,

“Carbon dioxide and other atmospheric gases merely serve to make the atmosphere cooler in daytime, warmer at nighttime. This is what empirical evidence tells us. ”

He asks us to think of how this interpretation differs from what the uneducated and pseudo scientists say that is “the greenhouse effect makes the planet warmer than it should be.” But we know that in truth what we actually observe is somewhat entirely different.

In the future, says Joe, people will declare: “The atmosphere keeps the planet from getting too hot in the daytime, and too cold at night-time”.

Just that simple realization alone kills the so-called ‘blanket’ analogy of greenhouse gas theorists stone dead.

Step Two: How the IPCC Picked Wrong Numbers from the Get-go

Now we address the IPCC’s biggest mistake. They started off with a flawed number, and then have to invent lots of other unreal processes and mechanisms to make the real Earth’s average temperature coincide with their numbers.

Professor Nasif Nahle points out that error in IPCC models:

“It’s quite simple. The flux of power on the top of the atmosphere is 1368 W/m^2; however, they [IPCC] say it is 341 W/m^2.”

Without an atmosphere, the Earth would be receiving a flux of 1368 W/m^2 of solar power (394K under the zenith facing the Sun). With the atmosphere, it receives and absorbs 718 W/m^2 (335K) on its surface.

Postma, a recent addition to the team sums up how much getting those first numbers right matters:

“We all agree that the atmosphere has an “atmosphere effect.” But what is of interest to us is how this effect changes if the properties of the atmosphere changes (a little).”

In this excellent paper geologist, Timothy Casey, gives a calculation for how much temperature variation will be caused by changes in CO2. It tells us:

“If carbon dioxide produced the backradiation claimed by Arrhenius, thermal conductivity measurements of carbon dioxide would be so suppressed by the backradiation of heat conducted into this material, that the correspondingly steep temperature gradient would yield a negative thermal conductivity of carbon dioxide.”

What Casey shows is that in reality, a 10,000 ppm increase in carbon dioxide could, at most, reduce the conductivity of air by a measly one percent and given the actual difference between the thermal conductivities of carbon dioxide (0.0168) and zero grade air (0.0260), a 10,000 ppm increase in carbon dioxide would lower the thermal conductivity of zero grade air by 0.36 percent.

Casey finds,

“That would represent a 0.36 percent increase in thermal gradient, or a surface warming of 0.18 percent and a ceiling cooling of 0.18 percent of the total difference in temperature between the top and bottom of the affected air mass. In the case of a tropospheric carbon dioxide increase of 10,000 ppm, that would correspond to a warming of 0.125ºC, or one eighth of a degree Celsius at the earth’s surface.”

“However, even if this wasn’t a negligible enough effect, Casey finds the proverbial doubling of CO2 would only contribute a change of 0.0040C at the surface”.

Step Three: Exposing the Idiocy

Groupthink is ‘Step Three’ in our explanation of how climatology got itself into such a muddle. Here’s a perfect example of scientific idiocy displayed by someone who ought to know better. Postma shows how a reality disconnect by one such theorist makes a mockery of IPCC numbers when applied to the real world. He explains,

“Yesterday a professor tried to tell me that a blackbody (BB) would heat itself up if its radiation would shine back on it – if it was surrounded completely by a perfect mirror.

I told him that all that would happen is you’d get a standing electromagnetic wave between the BB and the mirror, with a frequency spectrum and flux density equal to that of the BB – there’d be no spontaneous increase of temperature.  50C is 50C and there’s no way to get more than 50C, from 50C.  The only way to get more than 50C is to bring in some outside work or something hotter than 50C.”

Postma then enlightened the perplexed professor that it’s impossible to make candles or insulation warm itself by its own radiation.  “If we could make a candle burn hotter by reflecting it’s light back onto it, that would have been discovered long ago.”

The Slayers thus ask us to put it all in terms of radiation and conduction being analogous modes of heat transfer.  Then it becomes plainly obvious and ridiculous.

Like his learned colleagues Postma suggests climatologists apply a little more common sense and joined up thinking; their heat transport equations should properly be addressed in terms of conduction such that radiation and conduction are simply MODES of heat transfer. If an object can heat itself via its own, or “colder” radiation, then it should also be able to heat itself by conducting with itself, or conducting with a cold body.

“An object conducting with itself to make itself hotter?  What the heck does that even mean?  An object conducting with a colder one and thereby becoming hotter?  I don’t think so,” insists Postma.

Thus when we start to accept that conduction and radiation are analogous modes of heat transfer, then it dawns on us all that the laws work the same way with both of them.

Therefore, by working through this ‘Three Step Greenhouse Effect Debunk’ we are left with only one conclusion: IPCC junk (generalist) science is well and truly busted by the specialists in their fields.

Source: John O’Sullivan


Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Climate Disruption, Climategate, CO2, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, IPCC, John O'Sullivan, Science

Greenhouse Gas Theory Discredited by ‘Coolant’ Carbon Dioxide

By: John O’Sullivan

Science professor, a former global warming believer now denier, publishes groundbreaking paper to prove carbon dioxide cools, not warms our atmosphere.

Professor Nasif Nahle found something deeply troubling about the man-made global warming theory (AGW). He explains, “I started out wanting to debunk those deniers of science.”

Nahle had originally believed that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) were warming the atmosphere until he found an incorrect assumption on the Greenhouse Effect hypothesis.

Invited to attend a televised debate on the Indonesian Tsunami that addressed whether global warming was a factor in that catastrophe, Nahle checked the validity of calculations into the so-called greenhouse effect. “That was when I saw it was junk science.”

Nahle, from the Autonomous University of Nuevo León in Monterrey, N. L., Mexico, has worked professionally as a scientist for over 40 years. His findings are set to add more fuel to the fire in the vigorous debate over the validity of a cornerstone of the science of environmental activism.

In his new paper, ‘Determination of the Total Emissivity of a Mixture of Gases Containing 5% of Water Vapor and 0.039% of Carbon Dioxide at Overlapping Absorption Bands’ the Mexican biologist turned climate researcher proves that in nature, CO2 and water vapor mix together to decrease infrared radiation emissions/absorptions in the air. This is the opposite of what conventional climatology has been saying years.

You can read the rest of the article at the link below.

Source: Suite 101


Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Climate Disruption, CO2, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, John O'Sullivan

US Govt Caught Hiding Earthquake Data to Discredit Climate Skeptic Expert?

By: John O’ Sullivan

New evidence shows US is not reporting worrying increase in earthquake activity predicted by independent skeptic expert.

Independent observers are monitoring an upsurge in seismic activity that began occurring across the United States during April 5 and 6 2011. It is feared that an earthquake similar in magnitude or greater than that which recently devastated Japan may hit the U.S. any time.

A live feed from the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) internet seismic server inexplicably went offline several times in a two-day period at a time when it appears increased seismic activity was occurring across the United States. The ANSS has offered no explanation for the anomaly.

The tremors are occurring at the precise time forecasted by Piers Corbyn, a leading British astrophysicist and weather forecaster. Corbyn believes heightened solar activity impacts not only our climate but also sets off earthquakes. Lately charged particles from solar flares have impacted our planet’s upper atmosphere at speeds of 560 miles per second.

Citizen Scientists Expose Government Cover Up

Reaction in the blogosphere has been instant. A YouTube video ‘New Madrid — multiple charts show movement — USGS censors data again’graphically illustrates how increased seismic activity is showing up via publicly accessible government data yet the U.S. authorities themselves are not reporting this latest worrying development.

The main agency responsible, United States Geological Survey (USGS) is another arm of corporate government like NASA, the EPA, the FDA which has been under sustained criticism for similarly manipulating global warming data.

Instruments show signs of significant seismic activity in a wide arc across Missouri, Tennessee, Virginia, Kentucky and Georgia. A 3.6 magnitude quake (minor) yesterday occurred in Greenbriar, Arkansas but conspicuously, the Helicorder for Portageville Missouri showed nothing on their maps. According to Richter scale seismic activity of 6 or above is considered ‘strong’ and is destructive in areas up to about 160 kilometres (100 mi) across in populated areas. A magnitude 3.6 quake caused Nevada’s PEPCON fuel plant explosion in 1988.

Latest Graphic Earthquake Images Shown on Youtube

In a 9-minute video commentator, ‘dutchsinse suggests that such a broad spread of so-called “harmonic movement” across the continent as “concerning.” Coincidentally, the Pacific Northwest volcano webcorders also showed earthquake activity for this same period.

‘Dutch’ is also concerned that government-funded researchers may be intentionally censoring inconvenient seismic activity that would lend credence to Corbyn’s claims that lunar gravitational forces are instrumental not only on Earth’s climate but also on earthquake activity.

Corbyn has only recently launched his new earthquake forecasting service encouraged by the dramatic upsurge of interest in his highly successful long-range weather forecasting. It seems he may also be well set to provide an equally indispensable public service with his earthquake predictions.

On his website Corbyn announced:

“The 6-9th April is our first major (Trial) Earthquake risk period of April and comes with related extreme weather events forecasts. In these trial periods we expect an increase in the serious M6.0 and above quakes in quake vulnerable locations (and related increases in lower level activity) around the world such as the Pacific ‘ring of fire’. This includes the WEST USA which in this time period is probably more vulnerable than for decades.”

Coincidentally, the Kentucky Division of Emergency Management issued a press release (April 5, 2011) cancelling a media conference scheduled  for yesterday on earthquake preparedness.

Public Not Being Advised as to the Dangers

The greatest concern is for the Yellowstone National Park’s super volcano that also recently took a deep “breath” causing miles of ground to rise dramatically. Yellowstone’s caldera, which covers a 25- by 37-mile (40- by 60-kilometer) area of Wyoming, is an ancient crater formed after the last big blast, some 640,000 years ago.

Volcanologists say the simmering giant volcano is due another cataclysmic event. Such an eruption would be a thousand times more powerful than Mount St. Helen’s 1980 eruption.

Concerned citizens may wish to Twitter @USGS and demand to know why they are not reporting the data about these known earthquake events.

Source: John O’Sullivan

Comments Off on US Govt Caught Hiding Earthquake Data to Discredit Climate Skeptic Expert?

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Earthquakes, Government, John O'Sullivan, NASA, NOAA, Piers Corbyn

Thousands Rally in Australia to Demonstrate Against Carbon Tax

By: John O’Sullivan

A concerted Australian grassroots campaign holds rallies in six major cities to protest the imposition of climate change taxes and demand new election.

Thousands of protestors are challenging Prime Minister, Julia Gillard’s, “undemocratic” climate policies demanding either an immediate election or that her government drops all such proposals. They say imposing the taxes would be a betrayal of democratic principles because Gillard was elected with no mandate to raise any such taxes.

Speaking at the event will be leading MPs and scientists opposed to climate taxes. In response one Government Minister (Albanese) labeled the rally participants as ‘ratbags.’

A press release by organizer, Viv Forbes, Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition (March 23, 2011) announces that 22 diverse associations representing tens of thousands of Aussies will put the Gillard government’s environmental tax policies to the test. The Carbon Sense Coalition claims “thousands of Australians all over the country have signed a letter to Prime Minister Julia Gillard opposing the carbon tax.”

Skeptics say the government is wrongly basing its decisions on the discredited science of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Climate Taxes Will Achieve Little or No Impact

Forbes adds:

“This tax on carbon dioxide will have no effect whatsoever on global climate, little effect on the production of carbon dioxide but a large effect on the cost of living and job prospects for Australians. This is merely a wealth redistribution scheme where most of the wealth will be consumed on compliance, regulation, red tape, subsidies and price supports for the Climate Change Industry.”

Protesters say any such tax would hurt the Australian economy and gravely impact families, imposing an additional $300 a year on household energy bills. Australia produces only one percent of global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and, based on IPCC calculations, such a tax levied for 50 years will reduce global temperatures by an indiscernible 0.015 degrees centigrade and 2mm rise in sea levels.

Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard Faces Protests - Adam Carr

Negative public opinion polls also appear to be linked to the growing number of embarrassing revelations undermining the credibility of the IPCC for using dubious non-peer reviewed findings.

Disillusionment in the greenhouse gas theory of climate change is increasing among independent non-government funded scientists. Carbon dioxide is a so-called greenhouse gas and comprises just 0.04 percent of the atmosphere. Environmentalists and leaders of some the world’s wealthiest nations championed the greenhouse gas theory as a promising vehicle for cap and trade green taxes.

No Discernible Human Influence on Climate

Aussie climate skeptics such as Malcolm Roberts, have been at the forefront of promoting science that discredits the IPCC claims. Roberts published his own lucid rebuttal of the man-made global warming theory with, ‘Two Dead Elephants in Parliament.’

Roberts drew attention to the IPCC’s Table 2.11 (2007) that reveals by the IPCC’s own admission, it has ‘low’ or ‘very low’ understanding of 80 percent of all factors impacting climate.

In their Third Report the IPCC claimed that as CO2 levels increased then global temperatures would increase. However, since 1998, despite unending rises in atmospheric CO2, global temperatures have fallen.

On such evidence, along with other arguments, the protesters say there is no compelling reason to show human emissions of carbon dioxide is causing any climate change. Thus the imposition of climate taxes is both scientifically unjustified and impacts negatively on economic freedom.

Wide Cross Section of Society Against the New Tax

Organizers claim these are gatherings of Australian citizens with a peaceful demonstration message. There are no projected figures of the expected turnout but interest has been considerable according to the Consumers and Taxpayers Association. They say they had over 100,000 hits on their website within the two weeks leading up to the rally.

The cities involved in the ‘No Carbon Tax’ protest are Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth. The six rallies are expected to comprise many representatives of diverse groups including “Young Australians, Working Families, Students, Workers, Small Business Owners and Senior Citizens.”

Source: John O’ Sullivan

You can read my Co2 Insanity take on this here.


Filed under Cap & Trade, Carbon Taxes, Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, CO2, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Government, IPCC, John O'Sullivan, United Nations

High Earthquake Risk Now Imminent Say Two Leading Experts

By: John O’Sullivan

A U.S. geologist and British astrophysicist warn the Earth is now entering a heightened period of seismic activity that may trigger earthquakes.

Two prominent experts hold the view that earthquakes are not random events and may now be predicted in advance due to increasing sophistication in observational and predictive techniques.

American earthquake forecaster Jim Berkland warns of a “high risk” seismic window and potential for a massive quake poised to strike somewhere in North America between March 19th to 26th 2011. British astrophyscist and weather forecaster, Piers Corbyn confirms Berkland’s predictions on website (March 22, 2011) and warns the dangers are “imminent.”

‘Perfect Storm’ of Tides, the Equinox and Closeness of Moon

Berkland, a former USGS Geologist, warns that we are seeing a coincidence of several natural phenomena including the closest approach of the moon since 1992, plus a full moon coinciding with the equinoxal tide. He warns that this convergence of three of the most important tide raising factors is a “seismic window” of additional stresses on the Earth’s crust that may trigger quakes.

Meanwhile, Britain’s leading independent long range weather forecaster, Piers Corbyn, speaking on his website reports, “the world is now in one of its most extreme solar-lunar driven weather and earthquake/volcano events situations for at least 66 years and very likely twice that.”

Berkland suggests that in this top seismic window in years, the west coast of the United States is a high risk area. Piers Corbyn is less specific on the location but believes the time of highest risk is in the five day period of 23th to the 27th March.

Both experts emphasize the enormous power and influence that the sun and moon have on our planet. Such forces impact us in terms of both geological activity and Earth’s climate.

According to Corbyn it was the ‘X Class’ solar flare of March 10, 2011 that caused a significant hit on the Earth by a coronal mass ejection, which was reported by NASA. He says this, in turn, triggered the massive Japan super quake (M=9.0) the following day.

Dangers in the Pacific Ring of Fire

The most earthquake and tsunami prone region on Earth is known as the Pacific Ring of Fire. Around 80 percent of the world’s earthquakes occur around this volatile region that circles the Pacific Ocean (National Geographic).

It is here where plate tectonic movements of the continents generate enormous stresses on the planet’s crust. This build up of stress at the plate boundary causes rock to fracture; the plates grind past each other and the energy is suddenly released in the form of an earthquake.

Please read the rest at the source below.

Source: John O’Sullivan

Comments Off on High Earthquake Risk Now Imminent Say Two Leading Experts

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Earthquakes, Japan, Japan Earthquake, John O'Sullivan, Nuclear Power, Piers Corbyn, Tsunami

Japan’s Nuclear Tragedy Elicits Green Global Warming style Hype


Chernobyl today is being reclaimed by nature.



By: John O’Sullivan

Radiation experts studying Chernobyl meltdown confirm no long-term risks posed at Fukushima despite media hype over the nuclear disaster. Nature copes well, they found.

Last week the world’s media focused attention on the ‘Fukushima 50’-  those brave workers exposed to radiation contamination as they clean up after the explosion at Fukushima’s nuclear plant.

We examine the health risks posed from radiation poisoning by such a disaster based on a unique 12-year scientific study at Chernobyl; conclusions that show just how well the natural environment has fared a quarter of a century on from the world’s worst nuclear disaster.

Two top radiation experts, Professors Ronald K. Chesser and Robert J. Baker, in creating their joint study, ‘Growing Up with Chernobyl’ painstakingly studied and measured the true aftermath of Chernobyl. These world leading radiation experts present an astonishing new insight that no only shows how robust nature really is, but also exposes the extreme anti-science bias that for decades has ramped up unproven fears about the dangers of nuclear power.

I felt compelled to write this article in light of the media’s scant concern over Japan’s worst earthquake and tsunami that took over 10,000 lives. Despite the still unfolding tragedy from the earthquake and tsunami, the world media has instead chosen to focus on a nuclear accident where no one is reported killed from radiation science proves the outcome is likely to less terrible than is being portrayed.

I find I’m not alone in thinking that the world’s press has its priorities skewed and needs to take another hard look at the science.

In this regard I want to draw readers’ attention to ‘Growing Up with Chernobyl’, a study that will help provide some comfort to the people of Japan and which demonstrates a positive legacy from Chernobyl; a place where nature has shown a remarkable propensity not only to bounce back, but to provide a rich new bounty.

Green Opportunists Will Never Waste a Good Catastrophe

Frankly, no one can look at TV broadcasts depicting the heroics of the ‘Fukushima 50’ and not feel desperately sad for the future health prospects of the clean up workers who may face radiation sickness and the associated cancerous consequences.

But what is infuriating is that we can conclude from those images that to the media the tsunami and earthquake weren’t “bad enough” to hold their attention despite the ongoing crisis for Japan’s population with ever-increasing suffering due to starvation and hypothermia. No, the focus is all nuclear now.

As Christopher Booker cogently reports in The Daily Telegraph (March 19, 2011) eco-propagandists have been hard at work drumming up fears of a nuclear disaster for Japan “worse than Chernobyl.” But if we look at the science and not the media frenzy then there truly is no prospect of any such catastrophe to match the unprecedented meltdown at Chernobyl’s Reactor IV on April 26, 1986.

Nonetheless, that green urban legend about Chernobyl killing “millions” still survives. However, two undaunted professors, academic researchers skilled in radiation contamination, have collected all the facts to squash that fallacy after spending 12 long years painstakingly probing the aftermath of Chernobyl.

As with their fellow scientists battling to overcome the hysteria over global warming, Chesser and Baker have had to contend with an endless tide of green propaganda and censorship. In their quest for real science the pair admit they learned “tough lessons about politics, bias and the challenges of doing good science” on this similarly polemicized issue.

Chesser is a professor of biological sciences and director of the Center for Environmental Radiation Studies at Texas Tech University. Much of his current research is in reverse-engineering radioactive releases from nuclear accidents. He continues to work at Chernobyl and is currently examining the radioactive contamination and human health issues surrounding nuclear facilities near Baghdad, Iraq.

Robert J. Baker is Horn Professor of Biological Sciences Research at Texas Tech and affirmed world-leading research scientist. His research program evaluates molecular variations in organisms exposed to Chernobyl radiation.

Chernobyl Recovers to Become Haven for Endangered Species

Contrary to their initial expectations, Baker and Chesser were astounded to find that although the local wildlife around Chernobyl had undergone unprecedented levels of radiation “all the animals seemed physically normal….This was true for pretty much every creature we examined.”

After the initial decline of the animal populations, which were decimated by radioactive fallout, local wildlife is now thriving. The two were completely taken aback by the lack of evidence for any genetic mutations, as had been the expectation of most theorists.

The esteemed experts asserted,

“We also compared the genetic variations of populations inside the [contaminated] Zone with those from relatively uncontaminated areas, and we found no evidence of increased mutation rates from exposure to radioactivity.”

They found the most likely reason why Chernobyl has made such a remarkable recovery, “Radiation doses have declined precipitously since the accident—less than 3 percent of the initial radioactivity remains.”

Thus it seems, radiation is more quickly dispersed in nature than previous estimates had thought.

In fact, confounding all expectations the Chernobyl region has become a refuge for released populations of Przewalski’s horse and European bison; while the population densities of Russian wild boar are 10 to 15 times greater in the ‘Danger Zone’ than in adjacent areas inhabited by people. In addition, endangered black storks and white-tailed eagles are also more common in the “ Zone.”

The preponderance of such rich diversity of life has forced scientists to conclude that this so-called “dead zone” has effectively become a fertile natural preserve.

Good Nuclear News is Bad for Big Green Media

Despite these incredible findings being published in the prominent American Scientist Journal (Volume 94) this was not the kind of science that broadcasters wanted to show us.

Instead of being hailed as champions of science both researchers were met with hostility and mocked for going against the established ideas. The impartial professors lamented:

“We couldn’t find a single story that tried to explain the enormous difficulties of determining an accurate number for the excess cancer deaths caused by the radiation fallout from Chernobyl. The press did not attempt to explain the differences in opinions between scientists or the contradictory results of research on animals exposed to radiation.”

What they saw, just as with the great global warming debate, a propaganda war is constantly in play; ‘Big Green’ still insists on hyping the myth that a million died from Chernobyl when, in fact, independent studies put the actual death toll in the range of 38 to 4,000 (e.g. see the2005 report by the International Atomic Energy Agency).

Undeterred the two experts insist their unexpected findings will have

“…. profound implications for society. If there is an elevated mutation rate and loss of health, then appropriate measures should be taken to protect ourselves. No one would argue with that. But we must be mindful that the costs of over-regulation can be extreme.”

Backing this argument are the numbers that most starkly expose nuclear hysteria as per the statistics of U.S. death tolls:

Nuclear power plants……………. 0 deaths per year

Wind turbines (2008)…………….41 deaths per year

Candles………………..………..126 deaths per year

Bicycles (2008)………..……….716 deaths per year

Agriculture…………….……..1,300 deaths per year

Motorcycles …………………2,500 deaths per year

Car Phones (2002)……………2,500 deaths per year

Alcohol………………….…100,000 deaths per year

Tobacco……………………500,000 deaths per year

So why are broadcasters stubbornly stuck in the great rush to dismantle our western way of life?

The ‘Fukushima 50’ are undoubtedly brave and perhaps also knowledgeable about the dangers they face.  So if you want to be better informed about the likely risks posed by a radiation accident then read more from ‘Growing Up with Chernobyl.’

Source: John O’Sullivan


Filed under Co2 Insanity, Earthquakes, Global Warming, Japan, Japan Earthquake, John O'Sullivan, Nuclear Power, pollution

MIT Experts Says No Significant Radiation Can Leak from Japan Reactor

Above is a live Geiger counter located in Los Angeles, California, USA that you can watch. If you want to watch it live go here. 60 is considered normal. From what I read there’s not much to get excited about unless it goes over 100.

Top nuclear scientists advise that the reactors at Fukushima damaged by a tsunami and quake cannot explode. Situation is contained.

Dr Josef Oehmen and a team of faculty and staff have set up an information page at  MIT’s Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering (NSE). For those concerned about the dangers at the Japanese nuclear disaster should visit the newly launched MIT NSE Nuclear Information Hub.

Earlier an initial public statement via a press release  (edited by R Allan) advised the public of the following:

“Up front, the situation is serious, but under control. There was and will *not* be any significant release of radioactivity. By “significant” I mean a level of radiation of more than what you would receive on, say, a long distance flight, or by drinking a glass of beer that comes from an areas with high levels of natural background radiation. “

(Hat tip: Peter Dun).

What happened at Fukushima

The earthquake that hit Japan was 5 times more powerful than the worst earthquake the nuclear power plant was built for. (The Richter scale works logarithmically; the difference between the 8.9 quake and an 8.2 quake the plants were built for is not 8.9-8.2= 0.7. It is 5-fold.) So, the first hooray for Japanese engineering… everything held up.  When the earthquake hit the nuclear reactors all went into automatic shutdown. Within seconds after the control rods had been inserted into the core and nuclear chain reaction of the uranium stopped. Now, the cooling system had to carry away the residual heat. The residual heat load is about 3% of the heat load under normal operating conditions.

The earthquake destroyed the external power supply of the nuclear reactor. Then the tsunami came much bigger than people had expected when building the power plant. The tsunami took out all sets of backup diesel generators.

When designing a nuclear power plant, engineers follow a philosophy called “Defense of Depth”. That means you build everything to withstand the worst catastrophe you can imagine. Then you design the plant in such a way that it can still handle one system failure (that you thought could never happen) after the other. A tsunami taking out all backup power in one swift strike is such a scenario. The last line of defense is putting everything into the third containment which will keep everything, whatever the mess (control rods in or out, core molten or not) inside the reactor.

When the diesel generators were gone, the reactor operators switched to emergency battery power. The batteries were designed as one of the backups to the backups, to provide power for cooling the core for 8 hours. And they did.  Within the 8 hours, another power source had to be found and connected to the power plant. The power grid was down due to the earthquake. The diesel generators were destroyed by the tsunami. Mobile diesel generators were trucked in.  This is where things started to go seriously wrong. The external power generators could not be connected to the power plant (the plugs did not fit). After the batteries ran out, the residual heat could not be carried away any more.

At this point the plant operators begin to follow emergency procedures for a “loss-of-cooling event”. This is the next step along the “Depth of Defense” path. The power to the cooling system should never have failed completely, but it did, so they “retreat” to the next line of defense. All of this, however shocking it seems to us, is part of the day-to-day training you go through as an operator, right through to managing a core meltdown.

It was at this stage that people started to talk about core meltdown. If cooling cannot be restored the core will eventually melt… after hours or days. The last line of defense, the core catcher and third containment, will come into play.

But the goal at this stage was to give the engineers time to fix the cooling systems by managing the heating in the core and keeping the first containment (the Zircaloy tubes containing the nuclear fuel) and second containment (our pressure cooker) intact and operational for as long as possible. Because cooling the core is such a big deal, the reactor has a number of cooling systems, each in multiple versions (the reactor water cleanup system, the decay heat removal, the reactor core isolating cooling, the standby liquid cooling system, and the emergency core cooling system). Which one failed, and when, is not clear at this time.  So imagine our pressure cooker on the stove, heat on low, but on. The operators use whatever cooling system capacity they have to get rid of as much heat as possible, but the pressure keeps building up.

To maintain integrity of the pressure cooker (the second containment) pressure has to be released from time to time. Because the ability to do that in an emergency is so important, the reactor has 11 pressure release valves. The operators vent steam from time to time to control the pressure. The temperature at this stage was about 550°C. This is when the reports about radiation leakage starting coming in. Venting the steam releases radiation but it is not dangerous. The radioactive nitrogen and noble gases are no threat to human health as they decay in seconds.

During venting an explosion took place outside of the third containment (our “last line of defense”) and inside the reactor building. (Remember, the reactor building is not intended to keep  radioactivity in… it is to keep weather out.) It is not yet clear what happened, but this is the likely scenario.

The operators decided to vent the steam from the pressure vessel– not directly into the environment, but into the space between the third containment and the reactor building (to give the radioactivity in the steam more time to subside). At the high temperature the core had reached, water molecules “disassociate” into oxygen and hydrogen – an explosive mixture. And it did explode, outside the third containment, and damaging the reactor building around it. It was that sort of explosion that caused the Chernobyl disaster, because it happened inside the pressure vessel which was badly designed and not managed properly by the operators. This was never a risk at Fukushima. The problem of hydrogen-oxygen formation is one of the biggies when you design a power plant (if you are not Soviet, that is), so the reactor is built and operated in a way it cannot happen inside the containment. It happened outside. It was not intended, but was OK because it did not pose a risk to the containment.

Steam was vented and the pressure was now under control. But if you keep boiling your pot, the water level will keep falling.

At the start, he core is covered by several metres of water to allow time to pass (hours, days) before the core gets exposed. Once the rods start to be exposed at the top, the exposed parts will reach the critical temperature of 2200 °C after about 45 minutes. This is when the first containment, the Zircaloy tube, fails. And this started to happen. The cooling could not be restored before there was some damage to the casing of some of the fuel rods. The nuclear material itself was still intact, but the surrounding Zircaloy shell had started melting. What happened next is that some of the byproducts of Uranium decay – radioactive Cesium and Iodine – started to mix with the steam. The big problem, Uranium, was still under control, because the Uranium Oxide rods were good until 3000 °C.

It is confirmed that a very small amount of Cesium and Iodine was measured in the steam released into the atmosphere. The operators knew that the first containment on one or more of the rods was about to give.  This was the “go signal” for plan B.

Plan A had been to restore one of the regular cooling systems to cool the core. Why Plan A failed is unclear. One plausible explanation is that the tsunami also took away, or polluted, all the clean water needed for the regular cooling systems.  The cooling water is very clean and demineralized (like distilled water). Pure water does not get activated much, so stays practically radioactive-free. Dirt or salt in the water will absorb the neutrons quicker, becoming more radioactive. This has no effect whatsoever on the core – it does not care what it is cooled by. But it makes life more difficult for the operators when they have to deal with activated (i.e. slightly radioactive) water.  But Plan A failed. Cooling systems were down or clean water was unavailable. Plan B came into effect. This is what it looks like happened.

In order to prevent a core meltdown, the operators started to use sea water to cool the core. The plant is safe now and will stay safe. Japan is looking at an INES Level 4 Accident:  Nuclear accident with local consequences. That is bad for the company that owns the plant, but not for anyone else. Some radiation was released when the pressure vessel was vented. All radioactive isotopes from the activated steam have gone (decayed). A very small amount of Cesium was released, as well as Iodine. If you were sitting on top of the plant’s chimney when they were venting, you should probably give up smoking in order to return to your former life expectancy. The Cesium and Iodine isotopes were carried out to the sea and will never be seen again.

There was some limited damage to the first containment. That means that some amounts of radioactive Cesium and Iodine were released into the cooling water, but no Uranium or other nasty stuff. (Uranium Oxide does not “dissolve” in the water.) There are facilities for treating the cooling water inside the third containment. The radioactive Cesium and Iodine will be removed and stored as radioactive waste in terminal storage. The seawater used as cooling water will be activated to some degree. Because the control rods are fully inserted, the Uranium chain reaction is not happening. That means the “main” nuclear reaction is not happening, thus not contributing to the activation.

The intermediate radioactive materials (Cesium and Iodine) are also almost gone at this stage, because the Uranium decay stopped a long time ago. This further reduces the activation. The bottom line is that there will be some low-level of activation of the seawater, which will also be removed by the treatment facilities. The seawater will then be replaced over time with “normal” cooling water. The reactor core will be dismantled and transported to a processing facility, just like during a regular fuel change. Fuel rods and the entire plant will be checked for potential damage. This will take about 4-5 years. The safety systems on all Japanese plants will be upgraded to withstand a 9.0 earthquake and tsunami.

I believe the most significant problem will be a prolonged power shortage. About half of Japan’s nuclear reactors will probably have to be inspected, reducing the nation’s power generating capacity by 15%.

Below is the predicted path of the radioactive plume that as of now is predicted to hit the West Coast of the United States sometime Friday 3/18/2011.

Source: John O’ Sullivan

Note from Editor: It seems we have some controversy about Dr. Josef Oehman. One of the comments to this post (below) noted that there is another view of Dr. Oehmen. Here is a link to the article  “The Strange Case of Josef Oehman” at Genius Now so you can read about him and make your own judgement about what is being said.



Filed under California, Co2 Insanity, Government, Japan Earthquake, John O'Sullivan, Nuclear Power, Science