1000 words on Climate Change

I left the following comment at


The comment was spammed although the author did comment below.

“The scientific evidence is now overwhelming: climate change presents very serious global risks” Oh no its not! If it was, even the IPCC would be claiming it as being fact but of course they are too smart for that. Of course breaking western economies to meet the IPCC emission requirements is closer to fact but they dont dwell on that. Check out my blog and you will learn very quickly how much of a fact the “anthropogenic CO2 causes global warming ” hypothesis is.

Cheers Roger



5 Responses to “1000 words on Climate Change”

  1. rogerthesurf Says:


    Very nice post about oil reserves etc.

    Hasn’t got much to do with climate change though.

    Do you think nuclear power generation is a good solution for both “Global Warming” and declining energy reserves?



  2. djmcau Says:

    Hi Roger
    I did approve your comment, the same day in fact. Now your on auto and anything you post just goes up. I only delete personal stuff and profanity. I watched the video you recommended too. Very interesting, thanks. The end lost me a bit though but then all the scientists had left by then. As for discrediting the IPCC, I am afraid my energy is directed elsewhere. I posted 1000 words on Peak Oil recently, thought you might be interested. http://djmcau.wordpress.com

  3. djmcau Says:

    why haven’t you approved my other comment about replying to you within the day and still making it to your alarmist list. Also the selective bit of the post you quoted is a quote from the Stern Report.

    • rogerthesurf Says:

      I have approved everything you left at this site except a few fragments which appeared incomplete and looked like you were having some sort of problem possibly at your end.

      If you want to re-comment on what you think is missing of course it will be published.

      I also notice that you haven’t seen fit to publish my comment on your site.

      “Also the selective bit of the post you quoted is a quote from the Stern Report.” “The scientific evidence is now overwhelming: climate change presents very serious global risks, and it demands an urgent global response (Stern, 2006).”
      Maybe it was Sterns words, but it heads your blog and no doubt illustrates your current opinion.
      The assertion is also demonstrably false and the references in my blog show this clearly. The scientific evidence may faintly suggest the AGW hypothesis is consistent, but other important facts seriously disprove it.

      I agree the world is in danger from a number of sources, but as I suggested before, if you direct your economic research towards the IPCC emission reduction you will find the more immediate danger (to the humans on this planet) is very likely the most pressing danger.
      I dont have any issue on spending 1-2% of global GDP on reducing pollution and improving the planet either.
      However the cost of IPCC emission reductions are most certainly many times that amount and they do not address any issues of actual pollution in the least.

      Do not assume that we are advocating neglecting the planet. Quite the opposite. Keep on with your research and you will find the IPCC has nothing to do with looking after the planet either.



  4. djmcau Says:

    my post was about the shortcomings of the EU ETS and carbon trading schemes. How does that make me alarmist?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: