News that doesn't receive the necessary attention.

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Obama EPA chief has bottled water at UN Environment Confab in Kenya, Feb, 2011

6/27/11, "Warmists Achim Steiner and Lisa Jackson take fossil-fueled trips to Africa, then enjoy some

"Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson was spotted in Nairobi, Kenya for the 26th session of the governing council of the United Nations Environment Programme. During the session, a new report was released titled, "Towards a Green Economy" that suggested that investing in green technologies could spur growth around the globe." getty photo

2/21/11, "Spotted: Lisa Jackson at the UN Environment Programme," Political Girl blog

via Tom Nelson

Monday, June 27, 2011

Hey Jon Stewart, how funny is this about the 8 year old girl Islamic Taliban used as a suicide bomber? What a scream

Politicians who advocate 'sitting down' and negotiating with terrorists are either delusional or
Comedian Jon Stewart praised for helping Islam build a favorable image in the US by ridiculing people who think it's dangerous, CAIR and UC Berkeley, 2009-2010. 6/23/11.
  • Jon, where is the 'moderate' Muslim outcry? Where are the non-Muslim suicide bombers who force little girls to murder others as they force her to murder herself?
6/27/11, "Eight Year Old Girl Used As 'Suicide' Bomber," American Thinker, Ann Kane

"How evil can evil get? This story coming out of Afghanistan says it all.

Taliban insurgents used an eight-year-old girl carrying a bag of explosives to attack a police checkpost in central Afghanistan, the Afghan government said on Sunday, making her one of the youngest child bombers of the decade-old conflict.

The incident took place in Char Chino district of central Uruzgan province, the interior ministry said. "The insurgents handed over a bag with a homemade bomb to an eight-year-old girl and asked her to take it to police forces," it added.

"As the girl was getting close to the police,

Any politicians or diplomats out there who think they can "sit down" and negotiate with terrorists are delusional and/or

Read more Ann Kane at Potter Williams Report


6/26/11, "Taliban use girl, 8, as bomb mule in attack on Afghanistan police post," UK Guardian, Declan Walsh


6/23/11, "Islamophobia Report, 2009-2010," "CAIR and UC Berkeley list their Top Islam-Apologists for 2010," Weasel Zippers

"Some individuals, institutions and groups deserve recognition for their outstanding contributions to pushing back against Islamophobic trends during the period covered by this report. This list is neither comprehensive nor offered in any specific order. However, those listed below do deserve particular credit for their contributions to American pluralism....

"BEST (p. 13 attached)

6/23/11, Muslim "Man arrested in Pentagon scare charged in DC-area shootings at military sites," NY Post, Newscore

"And this is on top of the two men arrested in Seattle today over plans to attack a military recruiting station. But don’t worry, Peter King is still a bigot and a racist for holding hearings on radical Islam in America." WZ

6/23/11, "CAIR And UC Berkeley List Their Top Islamist-Apologists Of 2010…," Weasel Zippers


Commenters to AT article:


"Fuzzlenutter Yesterday 12:21 PM

But keep remembering this, folks:

According to American liberals,

and if you disagree you're a transsexual homophobe furry..."


There has been a denial of reality within our government for a long time. G.W. (Bush) reinforced it with his cozying up to Islam. It is ridiculous and will continue to get more people killed, eventually a lot more. You'd think that 9-11 would have taught a valuable lesson about that, but it was never properly taken by our government. They continue to coddle extremist Islamists and allow Islam to gain ground in this country.
  • It is a fatal error and needs to be stopped."


Its a shame that we are so politicially correct that we can't call Islam what it is - evil. Evil can not be negotiated with. Why the U.S. -- and Europe -- are coddling these 5th century throwbacks is beyond me. Why are they here -- according to their own Quran, they're here to spread Islam throughout the world and take over. It is what it is."

----------------------- need to understand that islam is NOT a religion and by it's very tenets will never go thru any sort of reformation. It is a totalitarian brutal geopolitcal movement that some argue is actually a form of satan worship. And you can see the point of those that argue that as it's "god" calls for murder, rape, slavery, lying, destruction, mutilation, pedophaelia and it prohibits all that is good about mankind...peace, love, tolerance, art, music, creativity and in fact does it's best to make sure that joy is wiped off the face of the earth. It is what it is and to expect anything different is to be foolhardy."


Why is it not sinking in to westerners, especially its present effete leaders that devout followers of Islam have a totally different mindset that cannot co-exist with ours except temporarily through trickery? The pretense that the mythical "moderate Muslim" is qualitatively different from those who sacrifice children as bomb carriers is suicidal denial on our part.

Excitable Muslims have no difficulty getting thousands into the street to protest cartoons of Mohammed, paranoid fantasies about ice cream swirls disrespecting Allah etc. Where are the Muslim demonstrations against their co-religionists' disgusting behavior? There are none because MUSLIMS ARE NOT DISGUSTED. Not only do they accept the cleansing of all Muslim nations of non-Muslims with sang froid and the killing of 500,000 blacks in Sudan by Muslim militias, they have nothing to say to terrorists who kill far more Muslims than non-Muslims. They may as well be from another planet for all their understanding of human decency. They are in fact from a past primitive era, 8th century troglodytes lumbering around the 21st century with bloodthirsty supremacist notions. In the West, it's been "Women and children first".

photo via Weasel Zippers

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Communist China holds back Airbus deal over objection to EU airline emissions trading and regulation

12/1/10, "EU Carbon permits missing from registry due to (computer) virus," Reuters, Nina Chestney

6/25/11, "China Trips Up Major Airbus Deal," Wall St. Journal, Daniel Michaels

"China's anger with the European Union's emissions-trading scheme for airlines has delayed the revealing of a major Airbus deal and could undermine upcoming deals, according to people familiar with the situation.

Airbus, a unit of European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co., had expected to announce at the Paris Air Show this week that Hong Kong Airlines Ltd. ordered 10 of its A380 superjumbo jetliners, with a catalog value of almost $4 billion. The deal's unveiling was put on ice by officials in Beijing, who must give final approval, these people said.

The Chinese government held off because it disapproves of the EU's intention to regulate greenhouse emissions of foreign airlines operating to and from the 27-country bloc, according to the people close to the talks.

An Airbus spokesman said the company wanted to name the A380 buyer, "but the political environment would not allow us to do that." A Hong Kong Airlines spokeswoman earlier this month said the carrier planned to announce an A380 order at the trade event outside Paris.

The A380 deal was completed before Beijing interceded and appears not to be in jeopardy, said one person close to the situation. But other planned orders for big Airbus planes

  • have been frozen, this person said.

"The Chinese have told us directly that their airlines are not allowed to get into deals with Europe," said a person close to the European side of the discussions.

A spokesman for the Chinese mission to the EU recently said that the country is "opposed to the EU's inclusion of [Chinese] airlines" in its emissions-trading plan. The spokesman didn't immediately respond to questions about the situation with Airbus.

For now, China's anger is unlikely to hurt the European plane maker, which has an order book of more than 3,500 planes for customers globally. But China is the biggest growth market world-wide for aviation. Airbus in 2009 opened an assembly plant in Tianjin, China, to tap the local market and curry favor with the government.

Airbus had also hoped that a major Chinese order would be announced when German Chancellor Angela Merkel meets Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao in Berlin next week. That planned contract could now be significantly shrunken or delayed, said one of the people familiar.

The EU's pollution-control plan, which is set to include aviation starting in January, forces any carrier departing or arriving at an EU airport

  • large fines for noncompliance ....
EU officials have repeatedly said they won't retreat on their program.

Christoph Franz, chief executive of German giant Deutsche Lufthansa AG, said on a recent trip to China that threats of retaliation against the EU plan indicate it is not working as expected. The EU had hoped that its program would prompt countries around the world to adopt similar measures.

Some European airlines have recently held back on asking for permission to increase capacity on Chinese routes because they expected applications to be rejected, said one person with knowledge of the situation.

The U.S. government on Tuesday formally presented its opposition to the EU plan for the first time at a meeting with EU officials in Oslo. A group of U.S. airlines has separately filed suit against the EU plan. The first hearing on that case before the European Court of Justice is due on July 5.

Concerns of countries outside the EU "must be taken seriously," said Ulrich Schulte-Strathaus, secretary general of the Association of European Airlines. The EU "needs to address these objections and come up with a solution which balances the priorities of the environment and international relations.""


7/16/10, "Carbon Trading Used as Money-Laundering Front," Jakarta Globe


10/8/10, "Murder on the Carbon Express: Interpol Takes On Emissions Fraud," Mother Jones,
M. Schapiro


2/1/11, ""Broken" EU spot CO2 market will struggle to revive," Reuters, Chestney


1/27/11, "European commission extends carbon market freeze indefinitely," UK Guardian, Leigh Phillips


5/30/11, "Exclusive: EU energy plan threatens carbon billions," Reuters, Pete Harrison


Saturday, June 25, 2011

EU gave $72 million taxpayer dollars for fake 'science' research grants-Nature Magazine

6/24/11, "What's Missing from this Story?" Powerline blog, Steven Hayward

"Nature magazine--not exactly on the top of the sales rack even at Barnes & Noble (I subscribe)--last week reported a bizarre story that is receiving no attention in the U.S. media that I've seen: The Eurocrats in Brussels have uncovered a massive organized crime effort that secured $72 million in fraudulent scientific research grants. An excerpt:

The fraud has been conducted in a "highly sophisticated manner, resembling money laundering", by means of a cross-border network of fictitious companies and subcontractors, says Pavel Bořkovec, a spokesman for OLAF (European Anti-Fraud office). Several project coordinators stand accused of having claimed inflated costs, or expenses for non-existent research activities and services, he says.

"The projects were apparently organized with the sole intention to deceive the commission and its control mechanisms," says Boublil. To make them seem legitimate, grant applications included the names of real scientists, established research institutes and existing companies, he says. But in most cases the alleged project partners were included without their knowing.

The strange part of this story is that it offers no details about what specific areas of government research funding were pilfered, or what "results" may have come of the fraudulent research projects they supported. Could it have been in the climate science domain, where the most government research money seems to be sloshing around? We know that there has been organized fraud in the European carbon trading market. Trading had to be halted back in January when it was discovered that millions of dollars of carbon allowances had been stolen and cashed on the spot market, so this wouldn't be the first time that organized crime had fixed on the climate circus as an easy mark. And one of the overlooked e-mails in the "Climategate" scandal involving the East Anglia University Climate Research Unit two years ago was a message from one of the scientists suggesting that a particular grant be routed through a Russian organization as a means of tax evasion.

Seems like this story needs some follow up."


Thursday, June 23, 2011

Deutsche Bank and US entwined with Malaysian boss 'behind destruction of tropical rainforests,' plea to Chancellor Merkel to freeze assets

6/20/11, "German Chancellor Urged To Freeze Taib’s Deutsche Bank Assets,", Berlin

"In a letter to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, three NGOs from Germany and Switzerland are complaining about Deutsche Bank’s close business ties with Abdul Taib Mahmud (“Taib”), the Chief Minister of the Malaysian state of Sarawak and one of South East Asia’s leading kleptocrats. The Swiss Bruno Manser Fund, the Society for Threatened Peoples and Rettet den Regenwald, a Hamburg-based rainforest advocacy group, are asking the German government to clarify Deutsche Bank’s business ties with Taib and to
  • freeze all Taib assets in Germany.

We are seriously concerned that, as a leading German financial institute, Deutsche Bank is closely cooperating with the highly corrupt and internationally discredited Taib regime”, the NGOs wrote to Merkel. “We feel that this cooperation cannot be in the interest of the German government, which is globally promoting the effective combating of corruption.”

Deutsche Bank has repeatedly conducted important business transactions for the Sarawak government, in which Taib Mahmud is simultaneously head of state, finance minister and also minister of state planning and resources. In 2005, Deutsche Bank was the sole bookrunner for the US$ 600 million listing of Sarawak International Incorporated in Labuan, Malaysia’s offshore financial centre. Before December 2004, Deutsche Bank arranged a US$ 135 million loan for the Sarawak Economic Development Corporation (SEDC), a

  • state body controlled by Taib Mahmud.

Deutsche Bank International’s Jersey and Cayman branches are administering the Jersey-based Sogo Holdings Ltd., through which several illicit Taib family assets

  • in the US are held.

In Malaysia, Deutsche Bank is running joint ventures with Cahya Mata Sarawak (CMS), the Taib family’s business flagship, under the names of K & N Kenanga Holdings and Kenanga Deutsche Futures.

Deutsche Bank is Germany’s largest bank and one of the world’s leading financial institutions. The bank left unanswered several written requests by the Society for Threatened Peoples to explain its business ties with Taib. The Malaysian politician is the main culprit behind the destruction

Earlier this month, the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) confirmed it was investigating Taib for corruption. In May 2011, the Swiss Financial Markets Supervisory Authority, FINMA, announced a probe

  • into suspected

Deutsche Bank raided in $238 million in carbon trading tax fraud, funds were supposed to 'tackle' global warming.

4/28/10, "Deutsche Bank, RWE raided in German probe of CO2 tax," Bloomberg, Carr and Matussek

Deutsche Bank 'cares'

With enough money you can make people believe you 'care' when you're really a mass murderer in a crime organization.
  • (Google has over 29,000 entries for Deutsche Bank's carbon trading investments).

UN Climate Chief is on the Bank's 'Climate Change Advisory Board':

11/14/2008, "Climate protection: Deutsche Bank set to neutralize its carbon footprint by 2012," DB press release

"Deutsche Bank Climate Change Advisory Board

Lord Browne, Managing Director and Managing Partner (Europe) of Riverstone Holdings LLC and former CEO of BP

John Coomber, Member of the Board of Directors Swiss Re and Chairman of The Climate Group, UK

Fabio Feldmann, CEO, Fabio Feldmann Consultores and former Executive Secretary, Brazilian Forum on Climate Change

Amory B. Lovins, Chairman and CEO of Rocky Mountain Institute

Lord Oxburgh, Member of the Advisory Board Climate Change Capital and Former Chairman Shell, UK

Dr. R K Pachauri, Chairman of IPCC

Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber CBE, Director of Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)

Robert Socolow, Co-Director The Carbon Mitigation Initiative and Professor Princeton University

Klaus Töpfer, Former Minister for Environment

Zhang Hongren, Former President International Union of Geological Science and former Vice Minister of Geology and Mineral Resources"

photo from Reuters article

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Proof of James Hansen's $550,000 cash prize for contribution to global warming 'public policy'-note to Mark Hess at Goddard Shuck & Jive Space Center

6/20/10, "Climate Scientists Awarded Prestigious Blue Planet Prize," Environment News Service
  • "Each recipient is presented with a certificate of merit, a commemorative trophy and an award of 50 million yen (US$550,600 or 372,000 pounds).
6/22/11, "NASA Scientist Accused of Using Celeb Status Among Environmental Groups to Enrich Himself," Fox News, w. Lajeunesse

NASA's taxpayer supported James Hansen "is now accused of receiving more than $1.2 million from the very environmental organizations whose agenda he advocated.

In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Washington, D.C., a group claims NASA is withholding documents that show James Hansen failed to comply with ethics rules and financial disclosures regarding substantial compensation he earned outside his $180,000 taxpayer-paid position as director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

"Hansen's office appears to be somewhat of a rogue operation. It's clearly a taxpayer-funded global warming advocacy organization," said Chris Horner, a co-founder of The American Tradition Institute, which filed the lawsuit. "The real issue here is, has Hansen been asking NASA in writing, in advance, for permission for these outside activities? We have reason to believe that has not been occurring."

The lawsuit claims Hansen privately profited from his public job in violation of federal ethics rules, and NASA allowed him to do it because of his influence in the media and celebrity status among environmental groups,

  • which rewarded him handsomely the last four years.

Gifts, speaking fees, prizes and consulting compensation include:

-- A shared $1 million prize from the Dan David Foundation for his "profound contribution to humanity." Hansen's cut ranged from $333,000 to $500,000, Horner said, adding that the precise amount is not known because Hansen's publicly available financial disclosure form only shows the prize was "an amount in excess of $5,000."

-- The 2010 Blue Planet prize worth $550,000 from the Asahi Glass Foundation, which recognizes efforts to solve environmental issues."...

(continuing): "-- The Sophie Prize for his "political activism," worth $100,000. The Sophie Prize is meant to "inspire people working towards a sustainable future."

-- Speaking fees totaling $48,164 from a range of mostly environmental organizations.

-- A $15,000 participation fee, waived by the W.J. Clinton Foundation for its 2009 Waterkeeper Conference.

-- $720,000 in legal advice and media consulting services provided by The George Soros Open Society Institute. Hansen said he did not take "direct" support from Soros but accepted "pro bono legal advice."

Hansen did not respond to Fox News' request for comment.

Federal rules prohibit government employees from receiving certain types of income outside their job. Employees are required to file Form 17-60 in writing before any outside activity. And annually, they're required to submit Form SF 278, after receiving outside compensation.

The American Tradition Institute filed a Freedom of Information Act request for those two documents for Hansen. The lawsuit claims NASA has "repeatedly and unlawfully refused to produced the requested materials."...

Mark Hess, chief of communications for the Goddard Space Center, sent Fox News NASA's response to Horner's FOIA request.

  • It said in many cases the

documents Horner requested did not exist.

Horner claims they should, if Hansen was complying with the law.""


3/5/2001, $250,000 Heinz Award (aka 'Ketchup Money'), praised for making (alleged) science into a political issue against industry, cites special merit for doing so against George Bush...


James Hansen says he owes it all to the NY Times who in 1981 put him on the front page. George Bush (the first) cemented Hansen's fame in 1989 by using the catastrophic 'greenhouse effect' as a sensational topic as he campaigned for US president:
"The recent warm winters that Britain has experienced are a clear sign that the climate is changing, he (Hansen) says. And that "...the global rises in temperature could be approaching the point of becoming irreversible. "...

  • (UK winters 2008-2011 were very cold and snowy. ed)


via Drudge Report

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

Richard Black and BBC have new catastrophe about oceans to the thrill of profiteers in the UK gov., UK monarchy, and organized crime

UK government functionaries Richard Black and the BBC now say the oceans are in scary shape:

6/20/11, "World's oceans in 'shocking' decline," BBC, Richard Black

Nothing Richard Black says on the topic of climate can be taken seriously as he is an employee of the UK government which has millions if not billions at stake in the global warming industry. For example:

In 2007 UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the carbon market was key The financial survival of the UK monarchy is dependent on the success of the global warming industry. The monarchy as reported has a new income arrangement which relies in part on wind turbine income. Prince Charles isn't technically with the government but he acts in a governmental role in pushing the global warming agenda part of which reportedly includes starving children. You may have noticed:

10/24/10, "'It is wholly inappropriate that the Palace should have such a direct interest in a subject like windfarms, given Prince Charles's obsession with renewable energy. It raises the question as to whether he is seeking to increase his own

each time he makes a favourable reference to wind power.'"


Money could be lost if the BBC and Richard Black said, 'the oceans are doing fine.' Ben Pile wasn't intimidated by the maze of 'coalitions' encountered in an effort to ascertain "the science" mentioned in BBC/Richard Black articles about the 'shocking' state of global oceans."

6/20/11, "
A Deep Sea Mystery,", Ben Pile

"Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water…

6/20/11, "World's oceans in 'shocking' decline," BBC, Richard Black

Warns Richard Black at the BBC.

The oceans are in a worse state than previously suspected, according to an expert panel of scientists.

In a new report, they warn that ocean life is “at high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history”.

They conclude that issues such as over-fishing, pollution and climate change are acting together in ways that have not previously been recognised.

The impacts, they say, are already affecting humanity.

The panel was convened by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO), and brought together experts from different disciplines, including coral reef ecologists, toxicologists, and fisheries scientists."...

Call me a cynic, but I no longer take claims about ‘expert panel of scientists’ at face value. Sadly, Richard Black of the BBC does.

Who are the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO) anyway? A visit to their website barely gives any information about itself at all. It doesn’t appear even to have an email address, let alone a postal address. There is no mention of who is running it, or what organisations are involved. Isn’t that a bit odd, for ‘an expert panel of scientists’.

Looking at the final report [PDF] produced by IPSO, there is similarly little mention of the organisation’s relationship to the rest of the world, such that we can see for ourselves what kind of a panel of experts they really are. However, at the top of the report is the following text:

The Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC) is a coalition of over 60 organizations worldwide promoting fisheries conservation and the protection of biodiversity on the high seas. The DSCC has been actively involved in the international debate and negotiations concerning the adverse impacts on deep-sea biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction from bottom trawling and other methods of bottom fishing on the high seas since 2003/2004.

Ok. So who the hell are the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition?

Surprise, surprise…

A coordination team works together with a Steering Group that currently consists of the Ecology Action Centre, Greenpeace International, Marine Conservation Biology Institute, Natural Resources Defense Council, Pew Environment Group and Seas at Risk. The DSCC has developed a formidable international team of scientists, policy and communication experts, lawyers and political activists who on behalf of the deep sea have established a strong reputation and profile on the issue at the UN and in other fora.

The ‘panel of experts’ — IPSO — may well be expert. But, look, again, we see Greenpeace’s name up there, steering the research — in its own words — alongside the Pew group, and Friends of the Earth.

I don’t believe a word of it. This is not scientific research, it’s ‘grey literature’, put out by yet another grey institution, the true nature of which is concealed from first appearances. Not far behind, the agenda is revealed.


I’ve been browsing the IPSO site, which is very poorly designed. The most charitable thing I can say about IPSO is that it is a project by Dr Alex Rogers, to pass himself off as an international research programme. Here he is, talking about the end of the world, like all good zoologists should."...

I made a bit of a mistake above. I thought that the front page would list its most recent research. It turns out that the research I was looking at, which was sponsored by DSCC was last year’s. This year’s project was sponsored by The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). So who are the IUCN?

[The IUCN] helps the world find pragmatic solutions to our most pressing environment and development challenges. It supports scientific research, manages field projects all over the world and brings governments, non-government organizations, United Nations agencies, companies and local communities together to develop and implement policy, laws and best practice.

IUCN is the world’s oldest and largest global environmental network – a democratic membership union with more than 1,000 government and NGO member organizations, and almost 11,000 volunteer scientists in more than 160 countries.

IUCN’s work is supported by more than 1,000 professional staff in 60 offices and hundreds of partners in public, NGO and private sectors around the world. The Union’s headquarters are located in Gland, near Geneva, Switzerland.

So, yeah, another NGO lobbying outfit, in cahoots with government and businesses, blurring the lines between activism, scientific research, and so on.

Back to IPSO. Here’s the web-page that relates to the new report. It describes the background to the report:

The 3 day workshop, co-sponsored by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), looked at the latest science across different disciplines.

The 27 participants from 18 organisations in 6 countries produced a grave assessment of current threats — and a stark conclusion about future risks to marine and human life if the current trajectory of damage continues: that the world’s ocean is at high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history.

So it turns out that this report took the scientists just three days of chin-wagging. Says the report:

The workshop provided a rare opportunity to interact with other disciplines to determine the net effect of what is already happening to the ocean and is projected to do so in the future. Over the three days 27 participants from 18 organisations in 6 countries (Annex 1) assessed the latest information on impacts and stresses, and the synergistic effects these are having on the global ocean.

Through presentations, discussions and recommendations the workshop documented and described the cumulative effects of such impacts, how these commonly act in a negatively synergistic way, and why therefore concerted action is now needed to address the consequences set out in this report.

Now, this is being presented as the product of a scientific process. But it turns out that it’s a little conference of self-selecting individuals, clearly given to a particular agenda.

The scientific outcomes from this workshop will be used first and foremostto strengthen the case for greater action to reduce anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide related to climate change and ocean acidification while also reducing other stressors. The findings underscore the need for more effective management of fisheries and pollution and for strengthening protection of the 64% of the ocean that lies beyond the zones of national jurisdiction. They thereby form a major contribution to implementation of the major IPSO report on the Global State of the Ocean. This event follows on from the IPSO/Royal Society event in 2009 that focussed on the future for coral reefs.

But in what way is the product of the 3-day gloom-fest a ‘scientific outcome’? No doubt, with a fancy name like ‘International Programme on the State of the Ocean’, citations to the report it produces will impress people. Indeed, it sounds like an expensive, exhaustive survey of the world. But it was just a couple of dozen eco-warriors in a single room, chatting about their fears.


Barry Woods has emailed me with a bit more on the profiles of some of the attendees of this ‘expert panel’ — the 27 people behind the “World’s oceans in ‘shocking’ decline” report.

The attendees are listed on page 10 of the report. [PDF]

Barry Gardiner is Labour MP for Brent North, and Vice President Globe UK, the Global Legislators Organisation. Globe’s about pages say,

there exists a strategic opportunity to coordinate a legislative response to key global environmental challenges in advance of Rio +20. This response recognises and seeks to strengthen the central role of legislators and parliaments in tackling the major global environmental challenges, as well as placing a much greater emphasis on the role of legislators in holding governments more effectively to account for the implementation of international commitments.

I wonder what Barry Gardiner knows about marine ecology. He has a degree in philosophy, apparently, so not much then. So much for this panel of experts…

Dan Laffoley is Marine Vice Chair of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, which seems to be the current sponsor, and is discussed above. Joining him is his colleague Aurelie Spadone.

Kelly Rigg - Executive Director, Global Campaign for Climate Action. No obvious expertise in marine biology, it says here,

Kelly Rigg is the Executive Director of the GCCA, a global alliance of 250 organizations cooperating under the banner of the tcktcktck campaign. She has been leading international campaigns for nearly 30 years on climate, energy, oceans, Antarctica and other issues. She was a senior campaign director for Greenpeace International during 20 years with the organization. After leaving Greenpeace she went on to found the Varda Group consultancy providing campaign and strategic advice to a wide range of NGOs, and led the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition’s campaign to protect the high seas from destructive bottom fishing.

Josh Reichert is Managing Director of the Pew Environment Group. They say of themselves,

In 1998, the Trusts established the Pew Center on Global Climate Change for the purpose of providing credible information, straight answers and innovative solutions to address global climate change. At the inception, the Business Environmental Leadership Council was created to engage the businesses community in the climate debate. The council included 46 companies, mainly Fortune 500 firms with combined revenue of more than $2 trillion and over 4 million employees. In 2007, the Pew Center played a major role in launching the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, an unprecedented alliance of nonprofit organizations and leading businesses—including General Electric and all three major U.S. automobile manufacturers—in support of federal emissions-reduction legislation.

Although Reichart “he has written more than 60 publications and co-produced films on the plight of fisheries and marine ecosystems“, it’s hard to see what expertise he has in marine ecology… “Mr. Reichert holds an undergraduate degree in applied behavioral sciences from the University of California, Davis, and master’s and doctoral degrees in social anthropology from Princeton University”.

Conn Nugent is Executive Director of the JM Kaplan Fund

The Environment Program concentrates on marine conservation, especially in ocean waters that lie beyond the jurisdiction of a single national government. The program currently supports grantees working to: create international protections for species and ecoregions of the High Seas; educate scientists and the public about the value and vulnerability of the ocean as a world system; and foment civil society movements to protect Arctic waters and Arctic coastal communities.

Conn Nugent’s blog profile gives no indication of his or her qualifications in marine science:

Highlights: • Exec Dir, JM Kaplan Fund (2000-present). Programs in environment, historic preservation, immigration: US, Mexico, Cuba, worldwide. • Exec Dir, Intl Physicians for Prevention Nuclear War. 1985 Nobel Peace Prize. • Founder/editor,,, • Freelance writer, editor, graphic designer. Harvard College, Harvard Law School. Peace Corps. Teacher. Exec Dir: Planned Parenthood California; Bay State Charitable Trust; New Alchemy Inst; Five Colleges; Citizens Union. Prog Dir, Nathan Cummings Foundation. Articles on land use, architecture, defense, fiscal policy, medicine, sports.

So, not much evidence of the scientific expertise that is being claimed of this team. Yet there are a number of agendas at the table. And some well-funded agendas, at that."




"David says:

You should also note that the only other person identified on the IPSO team was the former head of media for Greenpeace – she is doing a good job as Richard’s innocent little article has been re-Tweeted and shared in their network over 14.000 times in four hours. See"


Didn't like-emotional- thinks it's settled science

"Reader says:

“I don’t believe a word of it.” Which just makes you an idiot.

Now that you have publicly announced your idiocy, why don’t you do some REAL research yourself, instead of spouting off about things you obviously know nothing about?

I really, really wonder about all you anti-science, anti-evidence, anti-fact people. What in hell are you going to do when reality finally slaps you upside your thick heads?

Maybe YOU won’t starve, but others will. Or maybe YOU won’t see your fishing decline, but others will (and are). Maybe YOU won’t experience climate change effects first hand, sitting on your butts in your air conditioned offices, but others will (and are).

I’m basically SICK TO DEATH of morons and fools who think that they can outguess the world’s leading experts, using nothing more then their (unqualified) opinions as their ‘evidence’ (or straw arguments).

You people are IDIOTS. Truly STUPID beyond belief. The science data is there and it has been analyzed and reanalyzed again and again by the world’s leading experts and STILL you don’t accept any of it as fact.

Which must makes you quite simply, STUPID.

Willfully stupid in fact, which makes you dangerous. You’re all guilty of helping the decline, believe it or not, because a lot of other people will accept your unqualified opinions and agree with you.

Now we’ve got tons more STUPID PEOPLE DOING STUPID THINGS like continuing to contribute to the decline, with overfishing, dumping pollutants, increasing their own greenhouse gas contribution and overall just ‘going about their business with nary a care in the world’.



""We do worry a lot that there is not much coordination between those working on the taxation, the regulation and the pricing of carbon," said IETA's Derwent."...

5/30/11, "Exclusive: EU energy plan threatens carbon billions," Reuters, Pete Harrison

"The Europe Union's carbon market could be flooded with excess pollution permits over the next decade, cutting prices in half and depriving governments of billions in budgeted revenues, EU sources say.

"There's a real concern of negative impacts on prices if the issue is not properly addressed," one EU source said on condition of anonymity. "Some of the studies imply that carbon prices will collapse."

It is not clear, however, whether European governments will support measures that would erode carbon prices, which would put a severe dent in budgeted government revenues in 2013-2020.

It would also undermine investment in green technology, a key economic driver in countries such as Germany and Denmark.

The new "energy services directive," due in late June, will propose cutting energy consumption in buildings, vehicles and more controversially, industry. ...


One leaked study seen by Reuters foresees carbon prices falling to 14 euros per tonne, compared to a business-as-usual price of 25 euros. Another sees the price dropping to zero.

"The energy services directive could potentially wipe out billions of euros for governments across the EU, unless EU ETS allowances are set aside," said Sanjeev Kumar at environment consultancy E3G.

The Commission's energy spokeswoman, Marlene Holzner, declined to comment.

Carbon traders are also worried.

"The European Commission seems to be going back to the bad old days," said Henry Derwent, president of the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA). "We have a creeping re-ascendency of command and control in a part of the world economy that once prided itself on being market oriented," he added.

The problem was initially foreseen by the Commission's climate team, under climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard, in a strategy paper in February.

But her proposal to balance out the problem by setting aside the excess permits was attacked by some of her colleagues, who sought to protect industry from high carbon prices.

EU carbon market experts were divided over whether the dispute had arisen from clumsy policy-making, or if energy commissioner Guenther Oettinger in fact aimed to curb the role of the ETS....

They have already said security against organized crime theft cannot begin to be addressed until at least 2013 when a centralized system is expected:

1/27/11, "European commission extends carbon market freeze indefinitely," UK Guardian, Leigh Phillips

"Once there is a centralised clearinghouse, starting in 2013, (European Commission climate spokesperson) Kokkonen said these sort of problems will no longer be an issue:

"We have to survive till 2013.""


2/1/11, ""Broken" EU spot CO2 market will struggle to revive," Reuters, Chestney

"It's an absolute disaster for the spot market," said Louis Redshaw, head of environmental markets at Barclays Capital.

"We're at the point now where the market is essentially broken.

  • You can't fix it with security alone."...
Liability rules differ across countries and are yet to be tested. In theory, Britain and Germany, for example, have opposite laws, where the seller and buyer respectively get legal ownership of stolen permits.

"The spot market will not be the same. The serious question of legal liability may mean the spot market remains all but dead," Andrew Ager, head of emissions trading at Bache Commodities, told Reuters."...


In plain English from George Soros:

12/4/09,"Carbon Capitalists warming to climate market using derivatives" Bloomberg News

"George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator, says money managers would find ways to manipulate cap-and-trade markets. “The system can be gamed,” Soros, 79, remarked.... “That’s why financial types like me like it --

  • because there are financial opportunities.""...

"A victim of a famine machine that is entirely greens."... 12/28/10,
"...Fresno, Calif., stands as the de facto capital of California's mighty Central Valley, the breadbasket of America." But

2/21/11, "Green economy needs 2% of every nation's income, says UN," UK Guardian, Fiona Harvey

7/16/10, "Carbon Trading Used as Money-Laundering Front," Jakarta Globe


10/8/10, "Murder on the Carbon Express: Interpol Takes On Emissions Fraud," Mother Jones, M. Schapiro


11/14/10, "Climate policy distributes the world's new wealth," NZZ, am Sonntag, German press, interview with former co-chair of the UN IPCC Ottmar Edenhofer" a German economist.

UN environmental consultant says fraud in UN carbon trading can't be fixed, is interwoven in too many public and private sector jobs including the World Bank and the UN. And, "there is
  • nobody in that world that is critical of the process because they are all making their living off it.”"...
10/12/10, "A carbon trading system draws environmental skeptics," New York Times, Patricia Brett


12/1/10, "EU Carbon permits missing from registry due to (computer) virus," Reuters, Nina Chestney

"One million European carbon permits (valued at $19.54 million US) have gone missing from the Romanian subsidiary of cement company Holcim's (HOLN.VX) emissions registry account due to a computer virus,
  • the EU Commission said on Wednesday."...

Christian Science Monitor, 4/20/10, "Buying Carbon offsets may ease eco-guilt but not global warming," by Doug Struck.


Bloomberg News, 12/4/09,"Carbon Capitalists warming to climate market using derivatives"


You can get people to believe in anything. Most people in Egypt believe adulterers should be stoned to death. ed.

via Climate Depot

Fred Singer addresses falsehoods and smears of Naomi Oreskes

6/21/11, "Science and Smear Merchants," S. Fred Singer, American Thinker

"With billions at stake in scientific scare-mongering, opponents of the panic merchants are subject to smear campaigns." American Thinker

Professor Naomi Oreskes, of the University of California in San Diego, claims to be a science historian. One can readily demonstrate that she is neither a credible scientist nor a credible historian; the best evidence is right there in her recent book, "Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming," coauthored with Eric Conway. Her science is faulty; her historical procedures are thoroughly unprofessional. She is, however, an accomplished polemicist, who has found time for world lecture tours, promoting her book and her ideological views, while
  • being paid by the citizens of California.
Her book tries to smear four senior physicists -- of whom I am the only surviving one. I view it as my obligation to defend the reputations of my late colleagues and good friends against her libelous charges.

Oreskes is well-known from her 2004 article in Science that claimed a complete scientific consensus about manmade global warming; it launched her career as a polemicist. Her claim was based on examining the abstracts of some 900 published papers. Unfortunately, she missed more than 11,000 papers through an incorrect Internet search. She published a discreet "Correction"; yet she
  • has never retracted her ideologically based claim about consensus.
Al Gore still quotes her result, which has been contradicted by several, more competent studies (by Peiser, Schulte, Bray and von Storch; Lemonick in SciAm, etc). "...



Blog Archive

About Me

My photo
I'm the daughter of an Eagle Scout (fan of the Brooklyn Dodgers and Mets) and a Beauty Queen.