Question for the Climate Change Commission Secretariat

UPDATE 3 September 2020

I received a reply a month ago. See below the horizontal line.

Our letter to Dr Rod Carr, Chairman, Climate Change Commission Secretariat.

Let’s find out just how independent this new commission seems to be, or how firmly the Coalition has tied its hands to the Green agenda.

As far as I know, this is New Zealand’s very first Secretariat. It’s so 19th Century. So Marxist.


UPDATE 3 SEPTEMBER

Reply received 4 August 2020

Please examine this reply closely, as it may present opportunities to unstitch their assumptions and beliefs. Your thoughts would be valuable in framing a reply, so let me know what you’d like to ask or change. Thanks.

8 Thoughts on “Question for the Climate Change Commission Secretariat

  1. Cambridgedon on July 23, 2020 at 3:25 pm said:

    The “Warm regards” is a nice touch!

  2. Richard Treadgold on July 23, 2020 at 8:40 pm said:

    Thank you, CD. There’s no need to abandon all hope of elegance, is there?

  3. Richard
    I am a simple agriculturist but what would be of interest is to know why the likes of the Greens & CCC are being selective in what they tell us but especially that only man-made CO2, N2O & CH4 emissions are the sole cause of climate change when we know there are plenty of other factors eg water vapour, solar & lunar energy, that affect weather patterns. There are numerous natural sources of greenhouse gases eg wetlands, volcanoes plus all living creatures incl homo-sapiens that are conveniently ignored in their calculations because they cannot control them – but they are present!
    As for agricultural emissions i struggle to understand how the CCC can ignore the fact ruminants re-cycle CO2, grass is green for a very good reason but is ignored in the calculations that make up the zero carbon bill – why have they ignored that fact? any living green plant absorbs CO2 – & gives us O2 in return so we can live. Their rational does not make any sense!

    They need to explain this & show us the proof that 400ppm of atmospheric CO2 & 1.9ppm CH4 cause the climate to change! I am sure you can phrase it better than I!!
    thanks Andrew

  4. What due diligence has the government done on the IPCC claims that man made CO2 seriously affects global warming. If tax payers money is being spent on this ( $ 1.3 billion pa ? ) we have the basic right to a scientifically fact based explanation from our government and not just simply fobbed off with the factually incorrect slogans that the science is settled and there is a 97 % consensus. An official NZ governmental web with all the facts is required rather than some vague reference referring us to the IPCC by our ministers.

  5. Rickoshay on September 5, 2020 at 12:20 pm said:

    If co2 is as bad as they claim, why the mask laws? It forces you to breath more of it.

  6. Dr Carr states ” The commission is satisfied that the body of evidence of human driven increases in global energy content is clear and unequivocal “. I would like to know specifically what body of evidence the commission has used to form this opinion.

  7. Dr Carr also states ” the majority of professional scientists “. Is this a reference to the 97% consensus or is it a more fact based survey based on independent physicists who have not received funding that may have influenced their research. Also the assumption that a majority is right therefore implying that the minority is wrong and thus irrelevant is unscientific. It only requires one well researched paper to discredit many poorly researched ones Science is not about majorities or minorities , thats politics, science is about facts based on solid data. With respect Dr Carr needs to qualify his statements with fact based references to facilitate intelligent dialogue. I do appreciate that Dr Carr may not have referenced his resources for brevity of reply and look forward to his response.

  8. Brett Keane on October 8, 2020 at 12:10 pm said:

    Richard et al: At last I am getting back my saved ‘past computer data’. This is one superb example, that I started to use for my own experiments, still a work in slow progress.
    It shows how real Physicists understand the ways to sort out wheat from chaff. In this case, extraneous container effects as previously demonstrated by the Photonics pioneer Prof. R. Wood in 1909. Brett Keane

    The Experiment that Failed which can save the World Trillions:
    Proving the “greenhouse gas effect” does not exist!
    By Berthold Klein P.E (January 15, 2012)
    Edited by John O’Sullivan, incorporating comments by Dr. Pierre Latour, Professor Nasif Nahle,
    Edward J. Haddad Jr. P.E, Ganesh Krish, and others.
    Dedication:
    To Professor Robert W. Wood (1909), the first scientist to demonstrate that the Hypothesis of the
    “Greenhouse effect in the atmosphere” was unscientific. To all other scientists since Professor Wood
    who have added sound technical and scientific knowledge in many related fields to strengthen the
    case against the hoax of the so-called ‘greenhouse gas effect.’

Leave a Reply to Rickoshay Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation