Restoring Scientific Integrity

,

This report provides a summary of the discussions and transcripts from meetings with CSIRO. Additional links in the References section give an in-depth appreciation of analysis of the evidence provided by CSIRO. In the context of seeking CSIRO’s empirical evidence to justify climate policies, I know that CSIRO:

  1. has never stated that carbon dioxide from human activity is dangerous.
  2. admitted that temperatures today are not unprecedented.
  3. withdrew discredited papers that it had cited as evidence of unprecedented rate of temperature change and then failed to provide supporting empirical evidence.
  4. has never quantified any specific impact of carbon dioxide from human activity.
  5. relies upon unvalidated models that give unverified and erroneous projections as “evidence.”
  6. relied on discredited and poor quality papers on temperature and carbon dioxide.
  7. admits to not doing due diligence on reports and data from external agencies.
  8. revealed little understanding of papers it cited as evidence.
  9. allows politicians and journalists to misrepresent CSIRO science without correction.
  10. misled parliament.

Seventeen internationally respected climate scientists from Australia and five other nations verified our conclusions about CSIRO.
In conclusion, CSIRO’s science on the matter of climate for policy making, amounts to a gross misleading of Parliament. The onus of proof is now on Parliament to provide the empirical scientific evidence proving that carbon dioxide from human activity needs to be cut, and until that is provided, government must immediately stop wasting billions of dollars on climate policies.

200831-Examination-of-CSIRO-Evidence-for-Climate-Policies

Download

/3 Comments/by

Properties of Carbon Dioxide

Neither H2O (water) nor CO2 (carbon dioxide) are pollutants.

CO2, carbon dioxide:

  • Is essential for all life on earth;
  • Is just 0.04% of earth’s air – four one hundredths of a per cent;
  • Is scientifically classified as a trace gas because there is so little of it
  • Is non-toxic; not noxious;
  • Is highly beneficial to, and essential for, plants;
  • Is colourless, odourless, tasteless;
  • Natural – nature produces 97 per cent of the carbon dioxide produced annually on Earth;
  • Does not discolour the air;
  • Does not impair the quality of water or soil;
  • Does not create light, heat, noise or radioactivity;
  • Does not distort our senses.
  • Does not degrade the environment nor impair its usefulness nor render it offensive;
  • Does not make land water or air dirty or unsafe to use;
  • Does not cause disease;
  • Does not harm ecosystems and is essential for ecosystems;
  • Does not harm plants &animals. Essential for plants and animals;
  • Does not cause discomfort, instability or disorder;
  • Does not accumulate;
  • Does not upset nature’s balance;
  • Remains in the air for only a short time before nature cycles it into plants, animal tissue, and natural accumulations;
  • Does not contaminate apart from nature’s extremely high and concentrated volumes from some volcanoes and then only locally and briefly under rare natural conditions when in concentrations and amounts far higher than anything humans can produce;
  • Is not a foreign substance;
  • In past more than 130 times higher in conc’, in air than today.

In some locations within nature other atoms can be included with hydrocarbons as impurities in the resource deposit. These can include for example, Sulphur (S) and Nitrogen (N) among others. When these are burned in oxygen they produce sulphur dioxide (SO2) and nitrous oxides (NOx).

Along with particulates that are small particles of soot or smoke, these are real pollutants. Fortunately, real science has led to technology that removes virtually all such pollutants at the source or after combustion of the hydrocarbon fuel.  This is why modern cities in developed countries have clean, healthy air.

/2 Comments/by

Senator Roberts calls on CSIRO head to resign

, ,

CSIRO has been caught out relying on discredited scientific papers and unvalidated models as the basis for advice to government on climate policy, which is a multi-billion dollar drag on the economy. 

Senator Roberts said, “This is shameful, and I call on the CSIRO Chief Executive, Dr Larry Marshall, and executive Dr Peter Mayfield, to resign. 

“Both have been complicit in the economically destructive policies based on CSIRO’s misplaced climate research.” 

The controversial, but central claim, that carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate and needs to be cut, was the focus of Senator Roberts’ cross-examination of CSIRO. 

When CSIRO was asked for evidence of anything unprecedented in climate due to human carbon dioxide, and despite nearly 50 years of climate research, it could only provide the discredited Marcott (2013) paper on temperatures and the discredited Harries (2001) paper on carbon dioxide. 

Both papers wilted under scrutiny, with CSIRO representatives in agreement with the concerns raised, resulting in CSIRO withdrawing the papers. 

Astrophysicist and Geoscientist Professor Willie Soon was scathing in his assessment of CSIRO’s use of Marcott (2013) by saying “Two weeks after publication this paper was completely destroyed and yet, someone as high up as CSIRO trying to say this paper is legitimate and can be used as a supporting scientific evidence, is scientific malpractice”. 

Senator Roberts stated, “Robust science reflecting the highest standards of integrity and transparency should be the core business of CSIRO. 

“How could it be that climate scientists were unaware that the evidence being used for significant policy-making was based on poor quality and discredited scientific papers. 

“CSIRO’s lack of understanding of the papers they cited shows laziness and lack of intellectual rigor. Clearly, CSIRO cannot honestly claim that human activity is causing climate variability.” 

When pressed further regarding the view of CO2 being dangerous, CSIRO were quick to point out that they never claimed CO2 was dangerous, rather that it was politicians that assigned the word danger to human CO2. 

CSIRO also agreed that temperatures today are not unprecedented. 

In a last ditch attempt CSIRO referenced the United Nations’ reports relying on unvalidated computer models, despite freely admitting CSIRO had not done due diligence on any UN work. 

CSIRO also admitted it had not done due diligence on data from the Bureau of Meteorology. 

Senator Roberts added, “In my discussions with eminent international scientists, Professor John Christie stated he has closely examined CSIRO’s Access Models and found them below par, as the projections simply do not match what we actually see in the real world.” 

Professor Christie added, “Climate is so complex, our ignorance of the climate system is enormous, and the myriad of models have not even agreed on a key variable, CO2 sensitivities. 

“The CSIRO models are running overly warm and this has been proven when comparing real data of the last 40 years with the climate model projections.” 

Dr David Evans, one of the world’s top computer modellers, states, “CSIRO climate models should not be used for policy as they are not right yet. 

“The performance of all climate models, including CSIRO’s, are not sufficiently validated and consistently overestimate warming.” 

Senator Roberts added, “It is the duty and responsibility of politicians to base costly policies and economic structural change on robust scientific evidence, not discredited papers and deficient models.” 

Senator Roberts calls for “a halt to all climate policies and spending until credible empirical evidence is provided to justify the spend, and for an Office of Scientific Integrity to scrutinize science used for policy. 

“The onus is now on parliament to provide the empirical scientific evidence proving that carbon dioxide from human activity needs to be cut, and until that is provided, government must immediately stop wasting billions of dollars on vested interests riding the climate gravy train.” 

/by

Where is your COVID19 plan Prime Minister?

Yesterday I spoke in the Senate about the lack of a plan to live with and master COVID19 rather than hiding behind advice from bureaucrats in the health departments. There is no guarantee when or if there will be a vaccine. Where is your plan Prime Minister?

Transcript

I know that there are many grieving families, fearful families and concerned families. I raised the fact that in my correspondence to both the prime minister and to the premier of Queensland.

I expressed concern over their use of insufficient and flawed modelling to lock us all away and cause untold damage to our economy, businesses and jobs. Their responses to my letters avoided addressing the real issues.

Yes. If the federal government and state governments had learned, as I suggested in March from nations like Taiwan and promptly adopted rigorous testing combined with strict isolation of their sick, aged and vulnerable then many Australians could have stayed at work with minimal economic disruption and better health.

The difference is that Taiwan had a plan and relied on solid data. And as a result, Taiwan had seven deaths in the time we’ve had 517. They have a similar population to ours in terms of total population. Yet they are under greater threat because of the highly densely populated country and they’re closer to China.

The honourable John Houston in the Sydney Morning Herald, recently referred to quote, “planning or the lack of it has been the great failure of the Morrison government. It has been building over years of neglect and poor policy, but now it has been laid bare by both COVID-19 and the Royal commission.”

Queensland’s own chief health officer, Dr. Jeanette young, has stated this past week that she is only looking at the health issues. Mr. Acting deputy president. And this is very concerning. Who is looking after the big picture for us all? What about mental health, economic health, jobs, families, businesses?

The Queensland Premier referred us to the website location of her data. We checked there’s no relevant data, weak premier, irresponsibly abdicating, again, hiding behind the chief health officer, abdicating her duties. The Morrison government and the Queensland government need to both step up and to demonstrate leadership and to tell the truth.

They need to show us the data and the plan across all aspects of managing our way out of this pandemic and the resulting recession, and in the process, ensuring security for all Australians.

/by

Government caught out not knowing cost of climate policies

,

Yesterday, Dr Alan Moran released a report I commissioned on the cost of climate policies and renewable subsidies have on Australians. Today I asked questions to Senator Birmingham representing the Minister for Energy.

Questions

I commissioned the highly respected economist Dr Alan Moran to review government economic and energy data and to calculate the true cost of climate policies and so-called renewable energy sources. He delivered his report to me last week and a copy has been sent to every member of federal parliament including Senator Birmingham and the Minister for Energy.

Dr Moran’s work cannot be sensibly refuted since he uses the government’s own data that used to be published in a consolidated form until the cost of intermittent solar and wind energy sources became so embarrassingly and devastatingly high. Is the Minister aware that the true cost of climate policies on household through electricity prices is a staggering $1,300 per year?

First Supplementary Question:

Is the Minister aware that the true cost of so-called climate policies and renewable energy on household electricity bills is not the reported 6.5%, but a whopping and devastating 39%.

Second Supplementary Question:

On average your government incentivises $8 billion of malinvestment in green energy projects which results in a net loss of jobs in the economy; analysis based on Spain’s experience indicates with every green subsidised job created, 2.2 jobs are lost. With over 1 million Australians losing their job and the unemployment numbers rising due to COVID19, shouldn’t the government be incentivising job creating rather than job losses.

/by

Climate policies costing every household $1300 annually

,

Climate policies costing every household $1300 annually On Outsiders this morning, Dr Alan Moran release a report I commissioned which analysed the financial impact of climate policies and renewable subsidies on Australian households.

The report, ‘The Hidden Cost of Renewables on Electricity Prices’ uncovers blatant distortions and key facts that are excluded from reporting on the costs of climate policies. Here are the secrets the government has been hiding from you

  • Climate policies account for 39% of your electricity bills not 6.5% as reported.
  • Climate policies are costing you $13 billion a year through higher electricity prices
  • Renewable subsidies and policies cause a net loss of jobs in the economy, as every subsidised “green” job created, 2.2 jobs are lost elsewhere in the economy.

Read the report:

Dr Alan Moran Report – The Hidden Cost of Climate Policies and Renewables

Press Release:

$13 billion hidden cost on households revealed
/by

Dr Alan Moran Report – The Hidden Cost of Climate Policies and Renewables

Australia’s excessively high electricity prices are undermining our economic resilience and competitiveness and cutting our standards of living. Since 2002 Australian governments, in a misguided quest to reduce carbon dioxide, have introduced climate policies at the expense of cheap coal and gas power. Our electricity prices, once the lowest in the world, have become one of the most expensive.

This report, commissioned by Senator Malcolm Roberts, undertakes a comprehensive analysis of climate policies and renewable energy subsidies. Australians will be shocked to know the true financial burden of these policies on households and industry. These hidden costs drive up all costs of living, including electricity, food, water and transport.

In summary, the report states the financial impact of climate policies and renewable subsidies:

  • costs households at least $13 billion annually, or around $1300 per household;
  • accounts for 39% of household electricity bills, not 6.5% the Government typically quotes;
  • causes a net loss of jobs in the economy; with every green subsidised job created, 2.2 jobs are lost.

The full report can by downloaded by clicking the button below:

Dr Alan Moran – The Hidden Cost of Climate Policies and Renewables

View online:

200819-Dr-Alan-Moran-Report_

/3 Comments/by

$13 billion hidden cost on households revealed

A landmark economics report shows that climate policies and renewable subsidies cost Australian households around $13 billion per year, or $1300 per household.

Senator Roberts commissioned economist Dr Alan Moran to use all existing government data to examine, for the first time, the true cost of climate policies.

Senator Roberts said, “Australians will be shocked to know the additional cost of climate policies on our power bills is a staggering 39%, not 6.5% as the government claims.

“Using the government’s own data means that the report cannot be sensibly refuted.”

Dr Moran’s report, The Hidden Cost of Renewables on Electricity Prices, takes an all-inclusive accounting approach, including hidden costs of higher energy prices passed on by business.

Senator Roberts stated, “Governments have blatantly distorted and excluded key facts to keep Australians literally in the dark about inflated costs and future unreliability of our electricity.

“What is abundantly clear is the true cost of electricity would be $13 billion per year less, if cheap reliable coal production was not lumbered with policies that distort the market towards expensive and unreliable wind and solar.

“Artificially high energy prices savage our living standards and undermine our economic resilience and competitiveness, particularly during our COVID recovery.”

Dr Moran found that the weather-dependent wind and solar currently cost the taxpayer $8 billion per year and continue to receive increasing subsidies after two decades.

Senator Roberts added, “In terms of a true market economy renewables still remain unviable after 20 years and have become a parasitic malinvestment on our energy systems.

“These renewable subsidies distort low cost coal-based power generation and increases the wholesale price of electricity from $45.5 per MWh to $92.5 per MWh, at our cost.”

Further scrutiny of the job creation in the renewables industry shows renewable subsidies causes a net loss of jobs in the economy, because every subsidised “green” job created, 2.2 jobs are lost elsewhere in the economy. 

Dr Moran states that “the way forward must involve the termination of all regulatory favours which uniquely reward renewable energy supplies and the cessation of budgetary support for all energy supplies. “Weather-dependent wind and solar will never move beyond being a dependent parasitic infant and the taxpayer will forever pay for those inherent deficiencies.”

https://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/dr-alan-moran-report/
/by

Palaszczuk forces 16 Hour Trip on pregnant woman – 2SM with Marcus Paul

,

Transcript

[Marcus Paul]

Maybe we need people like Senator Malcolm Roberts in positions of greater power. Malcolm’s with us on the programme. Hello mate, how are you?

[Malcolm Roberts]

I’m well, thanks Marcus. How are you?

[Marcus Paul]

Pissed off.

[Malcolm Roberts]

I know, you’re cranky and frustrated, I just heard-

[Marcus Paul]

I’m really annoyed-

[Malcolm Roberts]

You should be too-

[Marcus Paul]

I’m really, really annoyed. Anyway, let’s get to some of the issues. I’m sorry, but did you just hear what Premier Annastacia Palaszcuk said today?

[Malcolm Roberts]

Yeah, I did, and what she’s doing is just playing the Queensland card. Queenslanders are very proud to be Queenslanders, but we’re also proud to be Australians. And Palaszcuk is running off the old trick, of just trying to isolate. And that’s what a desperate leader does.

They try and build a circle around themselves, and everyone outside is bad, and that’s what she’s doing. But she’s actually misrepresenting the situation. We’ve got two tertiary care hospitals in Queensland, we’ve got a couple in Brisbane, and we’ve got one centre in Townsville.

Now the Townsville looks after all the way from Townsville, right through to Papua New Guinea. It looks way out into the east, into the islands. It looks way west into the Northern territory, and south to about Central Queensland.

The hospitals around Brisbane, they take care of Central Queensland, north of the hospitals, and south of the hospitals into Northern and New South Wales. That’s our responsibility. We get paid federal money for doing that. And Anastasia Palaszcuk is misrepresenting the truth.

She has actually now, people are starting to wake up Marcus. She has stopped two twins in birth, in the womb, from coming to Brisbane for treatment. That mother would have had a helicopter flight in half an hour to the hospital. Instead she took 16 hours, to get on a royal flying doctor’s services plane-

[Marcus Paul]

Why is it you can say all of this Malcolm, but we’ve got a prime minister, who says stuff all! Does nothing, says nothing to call this woman out, says nothing about what’s going on with the border debacle.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Well, I believe we have a prime minister who’s doing a marketing job, and Scott Morrison is very much in favour of building facades and then selling them. Look, he’s caused a real problem with this cabinet, this so-called cabinet that he’s established.

I believe that one of the motives of that cabinet was to pull people together, that’s good. But the other motive was, if it went pear-shaped with their response, he would have had the cabinet to blame.

And so, what we’ve now got is we’ve got rampant premiers, and Dan Andrews not fulfilling his responsibilities, Anastasia Palaszczuk, not fulfilling her responsibilities to the country and to Queensland, and harming both those states, and who pays mate?

The prime minister pays, the taxpayer pays. So when Victoria has as a sloppy response, and has more cases of COVID, and has to shut down to a stage four, who pays the bill for the extra job keeper, the extra job seeker?

[Marcus Paul]

Well-

[Malcolm Roberts]

The federal government does. So, what we’ve got now is the complete reversal of our constitution which is based on competitive federalism, and we’ve got competitive welfarism. The more the Queensland, and New South, and Victorian Governments fail, the more money they’ll get. It’s ridiculous.

[Marcus Paul]

All right. Look, again, I don’t understand why they’re so quiet on this and look, and I know the way the system works, I get it, but I’m sorry, you’re right.

He’s just hiding behind marketing slogans. He thought he hit a home run yesterday with this announcement, this grandized announcement of vaccines, and then he tripped over the words when he went down the whole mandatory line.

[Malcolm Roberts]

This is just a repeat-

[Marcus Paul]

Then having to backtrack-

[Malcolm Roberts]

This is just a repeat of what happened with the COVID tracking app. You know, he came out, and three times he refused to rule out that it would be compulsory. So I jumped in on a radio station and said, “No, we are not gonna support it, if it’s compulsory.

“We’re just not, you can’t do that.” He was very quickly backtracking as soon as that happened. Now Pauline did the same with this declaration of compulsory vaccines. And she belted him and he quickly retreated. He doesn’t stand for anything, and that means he’ll fall for anything.

And that’s Scott Morrison summarised in a nutshell. But that’s typical of the Liberal and Labor parties these days. They don’t stand for anything and they fall for anything.

[Marcus Paul]

All right, what about compulsory superannuation? This 50-year experiment continues, we’re now 30 years into the super experiment, and without getting bogged down in any of the financial detail, is it working, and can we afford the increase the government has promised Malcolm?

[Malcolm Roberts]

Well, you know, the reserve bank governor has come out and said the rising super would reduce wage growth, and spending.

And he’s right, because what people fail to realise is this super has to be paid from somewhere. The extra super contribution has to come from somewhere, and it comes out of an employer’s revenue.

And so, the employer then has less opportunity, less affordability, to give wage increases in the future. So the money doesn’t come out of nowhere. It goes either into super, or it goes into increased wages.

Take your pick Marcus. And so the reserve bank governor is sensible in saying that. So I’m saying that we need to really consider this, and have a good look at it, because the contribution from super, the tax concessions on super fund earnings is now costing us 38 billion a year.

The cost in saved pensions is only $8 billion a year. That means there’s $30 billion being transferred somewhere else. And we know that it goes to the banks and the super funds and fees.

[Marcus Paul]

Of course it does.

[Malcolm Roberts]

So this means that what’s happening, is that the rate we’re going, the return to members would be below the projected return if it were not for taxation concessions.

So we really have to think about what we’re doing with super and we have to stop making it increasingly complex. Have to really look at it in a solid way, and then come back to having a solid strategy on super and stop changing it all the time.

[Marcus Paul]

Yeah, I mean if business is forced to increase super in order to survive, then unfortunately they may just take that out of wages.

We know that real wage growth has basically flat-lined over the years, and they can’t probably afford, given the fact that we’ll be in hopefully recovery phase by then with COVID-19, with all borders open and all economies chugging away.

So while business survives, perhaps individuals if you like, may be worse off. I mean it’s, I don’t know whether the economy can sustain a rise in compulsory superannuation.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Well, you’re absolutely correct. And it points to not only the confusion and the concern that people have with continual meddling with the super, but also it points to what we discussed last week and the week before Marcus.

And that is that our economy has been debilitated from about 1923 onwards, and then especially from 1944 onwards, with signing the Lima Agreement, the Paris Agreement, the Kyoto Protocol and all these things that have destroyed our economic sovereignty, our economic sustainability, so we’ve had a reduced economy now, and even before COVID, it was floundering.

So, as a result of COVID, it’s collapsed. What we need to do, when Morrison and Albanese are talking about lifting the economy back to where it was, we don’t need to think about February this year Marcus, we need to think about getting back to being number one in the world, which is where we were in the early part of last century, right through to 1920.

We had the number one income per capita in the world. And that’s what we need to get back to. And what’s happened is that the Liberal Labor policies of pushing UN policies has failed. And we need to get back to really aiming for being top of the world again.

We’ve got the people, we’ve got the resources, we’ve got the climate, we’ve got the opportunities and the potential, we’ve just got wombats running the show in Canberra. That’s what we need to change.

[Marcus Paul]

All right, good to have you on the programme as always Malcolm. Calling a shovel a bloody spade. Appreciate it, we’ll talk to you next week. Thank you.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Thanks Marcus.

/by

Letter to Home Affairs Minister: Foreign Departure Ban

Dear Minister

I write in support of Mr Martin Thomson and his son Harry’s application for an exemption from the overseas travel ban to travel from Australia to Scotland.  Separately, and without impinging on that request, I ask the government to adopt a more supportive approach to persons wishing to travel from Australia.

Mr Martin Thomson

I am informed of the following:

Martin Thomson is a UK National with permanent residency in Australia.  I believe it is important to note that Mr Thomson is a non-citizen trying to leave Australia.  Mr Thomson’s father, James, is in Scotland and has prostate cancer.  James is on treatment for his cancer and does not know how long he has to live.  Mr Thomson’s mother, Susanna, is unable to drive and has arthritis which makes caring for James very difficult.  Mr Thomson wishes to leave the country with his son to care for and see his father, in what may be the final stages of his life.

Mr Thomson has booked a one-way flight back to the UK for both him and his son, has resigned from his workplace in Australia and will be freighting his belongings in Australia back to the UK.  He understands the quarantine requirements in the UK upon arrival, due to his stopover in Dubai, and has undertaken to comply with them fully.

I have seen handwritten letters from Mr Thomson’s parents pleading for our government’s compassion on this issue.  Susanna writes, “… my arthritis is making everything harder! I do need them home very badly!  To help!” Heartbreakingly, 80 year old James writes, “I do not know how long I have to live and as you can imagine I am in my later years, I would dearly love to see my son and grandson back home in Scotland before I pass on out of this life”. 

I struggle to think of circumstances that deserve our compassion as much as the one Mr Thomson finds himself in.  We are Australians and we pride ourselves on fairness.  Allowing people to leave this country to take care of dying family members is the absolute least we can do to live up to that pride.

I ask and encourage in the sincerest terms possible that the Government consider favourably the applications of Mr Thomson and his son, and also any others who find themselves in similar circumstances.

Let people leave

Separately to my support of Mr Thomson and his son’s application, I wish to request that the government relax its restrictions on people exiting the country.  Many Australians are not aware the government has currently banned them from leaving the country without a permit.

I understand that of the more than 90,000 applications made to leave the country from 25 March to 31 July, Australian Border Force has approved 22,640, around only 1 in 4.  As far as we know, Australia is the only liberal democracy in the world with a blanket ban on citizens, let alone non-citizens, leaving the country.

We have heard of people being refused exemptions to leave the country to return to where they hold citizenship, to see a daughter’s marriage and, in the case of Mr Thomson, to care for his dying father.

The only justification presented for this ban on leaving the country has been that if we let people out, they might come back one day.  The outgoing travel ban was implemented at a time when states and territories were picking up the bill for hotel quarantine.  However, this is no longer the case.  Taxpayers are not footing the bill and anyone leaving the country understands they will personally pay up to $3,000 for hotel quarantine if they choose to return. 

I suggest that this request is reasonable given the Government is considering welcoming international visitors who are prepared to quarantine and is already trialling bringing in international students.  No comparable countries to Australia, such as the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canada, the United States of America and others have this restriction on departures in place. 

We must manage the risk of COVID-19 not by preventing Australians from leaving but controlling their return to Australia as well as foreign arrivals into Australia.  We already control the return of people to Australia with user-pay hotel quarantine.

The current policy regarding leaving Australia is causing a great deal of unnecessary heartbreak and is an unjustified infringement of liberty.  I ask the government to reconsider its current approach to the prohibition on departures from Australia and to adopt a much more compassionate and practical approach.

Yours sincerely

Senator Malcolm Roberts

Senator for Queensland

200827-MartinThomson

/by