Joe Calleja, Qormi
Climategate, falling birth rates, sea levels and the financial 'sword on our necks' (1)
I tend to agree with Prof. David Attard (The Sunday Times, December 6) that "the risk is just too great to take", and "Malta's efforts to influence the international debate needs to be reconsidered".
Quite so: the risk is really just too great and Malta needs to reconsider its efforts on this climate change frenzy, before going along with the massive international tax and spending schemes which the Climategate scandal exposes and confirms as unnecessary and fraudulent.
This massive anthropological global warming (AGW) swindle, up till the 1980s was rightly considered no more than science fiction. We should instead concentrate on facts, and ask some questions.
Let's start with the supposed sea-level rise. The same European Environmental Agency quoted in your special two-page spread on climate change does not even include 'sea-level rise' in its predictions for the Mediterranean region.
It could not be otherwise. Not even the Maldives really faces any threat of being "wiped out", as Prof. Attard alleged. Dr Nils-Axel Mörner, who knows more about sea-level rise than anyone and has been to thousands of locations actually doing sea-level studies found that levels there have fallen by between 20 and 30 cm in the 1970s, and have since remained stable.
It's obvious then that the government there is using this sea-level fable to get industrialised countries to hand out money.
About 'secret meetings' (why these had to be secret he never made clear) and the failed Hague Declaration on Environment, Prof. Attard will recall that participant states pledged that unanimous agreement is not to be sought in the fight against global warming. In this sense the Hague Declaration was a 'radical' document as it accepted that nations can be bound without their consent.
This is really why that declaration was "watered down".
On trading emissions I would need a whole page to explain the folly of these supposedly emission-reduction schemes. Perhaps some other time.
The latest Eurobarometer survey shows that Europeans' consideration of climate change as the world's most serious problem has dropped from 62 per cent in April 2008 to 47 per cent.
And the Maltese? In April 2008 64 per cent considered climate change as the world's most serious problem. The last survey shows a drop of 10 points to 54 per cent.
Can Prof. Attard illuminate me as to where in this last survey it says that 60 per cent of Maltese consider fighting climate change as important?
Scientific evidence of human-caused climate change always was and, after Climategate, is far from certain. The main scientific body behind IPCC, the UK Climate Research Unit, has been exposed as not only tampering its own findings to accommodate the global warming hoax, but in the incriminating e-mails you can also read about plots and efforts to demean or denigrate any climate scientists who disagreed or strayed from the AGW dogma.
A final consideration: 0.01 per cent. This is Malta's share of CO2 emissions, Malta's carbon footprint: just 0.01 per cent of global emissions. So much so that, under the still current Kyoto Protocol, Malta has no emission limitation commitments.
Malta ratified the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change as a non-Annex I party, which includes mostly developing countries, and the UN considers us among the Small Island Developing States (SIDS).
This is why Malta, together with Cyprus, under the Kyoto Protocol, has exceptional status also within the European Union.
Therefore, I am at a loss to understand why now we Maltese - as our Prime Minister declared - have "a guillotine or sword on our necks", referring, I presume, to future penalties for failing to comply with EU targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Furthermore why are we to fork out millions of euros a year towards an EU fund aimed at helping developing countries fight climate change, when Malta is considered a developing island nation with such low emissions?
Popular Stories
In Discussion
8 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Joseph Ellul - Sydney
Dec 14th 2009, 07:57
Malta used to be a developed country. Now it is dropping back in the IT side due to brain drain and also in trades. Malta has become more reliant on tourism and servicing due to political policies and withen a decade Gozo will be asking for independence from Malta so that they can claim carbon credits for themselves while the Maltese will still be blowing hot air about how advanced they are. Gonzi should swallow his pride and when at Hope and Hangen should join the poor nations and ask for alms not promise to give money. Where is he going to get this money ? I forgot. Malta does have a money making machine.
Alex Ellul
Dec 14th 2009, 01:01
/Continued..that was followed by the Little Ice Age which was followed by the last warming, the one you are blaming on CO2. This link http://www.co2science.org/articles/V11/N25/C2.php is a scientific report on the previous warmings and coolings the planet went through, and proving that the current warming (which has actually ended) is (was) less warm than the Rooman and the Medieval warm periods. Now you tell me, what was the CO2 level during the Roman and medieval times? IT WAS LESS THAN TODAY BY 100PPM. But still it was warmer than today. Why? Because there are other forcings that cause warmings and coolings, the major forcing being our sun, that thing that rises in the east every morning and sets in the west every evening, every day. This is the only forcing on our planet and no man is able to reduce or increase the planet's temperature by a fraction of a degree. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but water vapour is 100 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas. CO2 is therefore innocuous (its a life giver, plants and vegetation need it) and we do not have any control whatsover on the level of water vapour in our atmosphere.
Alex Ellul
Dec 14th 2009, 00:57
Hi George. I m so disappointed at your lack of knowledge even on what global warmist scientists say. This decade was supposed to be hot according to Michael Mann's Hockey-Stick Graph as predicted by the IPCC's computer models. But temperatures are refusing to obey this graph, which is now considered as dead. As you know by now, I always back up my comments with science. Last time we crossed keyboards I asked you to give me proof of how a few parts per million of CO2 molecules increase the global average temperature of our planet. However you refused, adding that you believe what the British Medical Council says, or words to this effect. Since then, as I have been predicting, the Climategate bombshell has exploded. You should have the courage to read about this scandal, the previous one to that, the Briffa scandl and all about how the UN's IPCC reports are based on cooked, manipulated, proxy temperatures that made the Medieval Warming disappear from the global temperature graphs of the past millenium, including the little ice age (LIA). The last 5000 years have seen four coolings and five warmings, including the Roman, Dark-Age and the Medieval warming...continued..
Joe Calleja
Dec 14th 2009, 00:13
Oh come on Mr Debono.
Did you know that the "few outsiders" are over 700 scientists and climate researchers from around the globe who last March updated a 2007 report which continued to debunk the supposed consensus on man-made global warming.
And do you know how many were the "majority" scientists which you side with, who authored the media-hyped UN-IPCC 2007 Report? Just 52, and now Climategate has completely discredited that report. How? Read the Science & Public Pollicy Institute paper "Caught Green-Handed" here: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/Monckton-Caught%20Green-Handed%20Climategate%20Scandal.pdf or just take a look at my blog: http://enricomizzi.blogspot.com/
cassar i
Dec 13th 2009, 22:12
Tumbs up Mr Calleja. As I already stated and Mr A Ellul mentioned here It all boils down to oil. No oil No power. Apart from this the sun solar etc etc see Actionweather in Uk. as per BBC reporter report of last thursday.
George Debono
Dec 13th 2009, 17:18
Al
I would have expected better from you.
Are you serious when you use the statement: ..... "Global warming stopped in 1998 while the planet started cooling in 2003"
Surely even you know perfectly well that a blip doesn't buck a trend.
Global warming hasn't started to bite yet and it probably won't in our lifetimes - it will do so imperceptibly over the coming century or so.
I am afraid I side with the majority of scientists and not a few outsiders (possibly in the pay of Shell, Exxon, Esso….) . Besides - as I keep saying - cutting down on fossil fuels will, at the same time, be good for pollution and our health. The British Medical Association also argues on these lines (Public health benefits of strategies - to reduce greenhouse gas emissions - What’s good for the climate is good for health BMJ 2009;339:b4952)
. So cutting down on Fossil fuels is a win-win situation.) . So what is good for the goose is good for the gander….
I still think it is utterly irresponsible to be so pig headed in the face of the grim possibility of climate change.
G
Paul Caruana
Dec 13th 2009, 16:58
It is becoming increasingly evident that the scientific community must be able to present more clear evidence of a long term trend in global warming, and must do so in a way that is understandable to the general public.
Otherwise the naysayers will go from strength to strength and public opinion, together with its appetite for the painful changes that developed countries such as Malta will have to go through for the next few decades, will on this issue falter.
Alex Ellul
Dec 13th 2009, 13:55
Prosit Mr. Calleja. Global warming stopped in 1998 while the planet started cooling in 2003. We can even feel it in Malta too. The last summer temperature record was in the late ninetees at 43.6 C. Winters have become colder since then and summers never reached that temperature again. It has emerged that the global warming during the latter part of the 20th century was due to a highly active sun while the present cooling is due to a solar minimum, very similar to the Maunder minimum that made the thames river freeze over during winters.
The global warming global hoax is now nearly opver. Cop 15 is the last call for a global political agreement to tax people and reduce the world's poor to a worse situation while turning the UN into a sort of leftist global government, commanding energy purchases and rationing oil and coal according to its whims. Should this agreement, a very unlikey occurance, succeed, then we would see a sharp drop in the average global living standard. It will send us back to a pre-war standard of living, while temperatures and sea levels would still be what they are today.