Friday, June 24, 2011


for discovering

Challenge your MP’s
to think for themselves before voting
on carbon dioxide taxes

Three essentials:

1. Please provide one piece of specific, scientifically measured real-world evidence proving that human production of carbon dioxide (CO2) caused Earth’s latest, modest, cyclic global warming that ended around 1998.

2. By taxing carbon dioxide, to what specific temperature will the world’s atmosphere be reduced?

3. What will be the cost of reducing the temperature?

If MP’s cannot adequately answer even one of these three essential questions, they have no right to propose any tax. They have no basis for imposing artificial costs on our energy choices. They have no basis for imposing subsidies favouring special interests.

Asking MP’s how they can justify fraud and insanity

4. Are Greens-ALP politicians aware that each report by the UN’s climate body (1990, 1995, 2001, 2007) has been based on a falsity that contradicted science?

The Greens-ALP coalition says their climate policies are based on reports from the UN’s climate body. Those reports falsely claim human carbon dioxide production will catastrophically warm our planet. Why is the Greens-ALP coalition continuing to spread misrepresentations repeatedly proven to be fraud?

5. Please provide real-world scientific evidence that human carbon dioxide (CO2) is dangerous yet Nature’s identical carbon dioxide remains essential to all life on Earth.

Here’s a way to understand carbon dioxide basics:

➤➤Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a natural trace gas being just 0.0385% of the atmosphere—in every 2,600 molecules of air, that’s just one (1) molecule of CO2;

➤➤Of Earth’s annual carbon dioxide production, Nature produces 97%. All human activity produces only 3%.

This means that in every 85,800 molecules of air, one (1) molecule is CO2 produced by humans and 32 molecules are CO2 produced by Nature.

This triggers two questions:

6. In every 85,800 molecules of air, how can one (1) molecule of CO2 produced by human activity catastrophically warm our planet? How can that one (1) molecule warm the planet yet Nature’s 32 molecules of CO2 not?

Of the human production of CO2, just 1%-1.3% is produced in Australia. Let’s use 1.5%:

Then CO2 produced by Australian people and industry represents one (1) molecule in 5.7 million molecules of air. Cutting that by the government’s target of 5% would mean Aussies would produce one (1) molecule in 6.0 million.

Remind politicians that those figures are used on the assumption that the UN climate body’s ‘greenhouse gas’ supposition is correct. Yet the UN’s supposition is proven completely unfounded. It contradicts Nature. Human production of CO2 does NOT warm the planet. It cannot warm the planet.

7. Do you know that total annual human production of CO2 is estimated to be less than just the inherent variation in Nature’s annual CO2 production? Yet Nature easily handles that variation.

8. Where is evidence that warming hurts our planet and its environment or humanity? Science and history prove Earth’s past warm periods highly beneficial.

9. When did humans get control of galactic, solar, planetary, oceanic, atmospheric, El Nino, cloud and volcanic forces that control climate?

Humans do not control Earth’s temperature.

So how can MP’s justify a carbon dioxide tax?

10. Why do some politicians refer to carbon dioxide as ‘carbon pollution’? On what basis do they call it pollution? It’s a trace gas produced almost entirely by Nature. Its atmospheric level is determined entirely by Nature. It’s essential for all complex life on Earth. It’s part of Nature’s carbon cycle the basis for all our food. How can it be a pollutant?

It’s not pollution.

11. To make carbon dioxide consumes carbon and oxygen—will politicians be advocating taxing oxygen? If not why, not?

Every molecule of CO2 is made from one atom of carbon and two atoms of oxygen.

When carbon dioxide (CO2) gas is naturally and quickly removed by Nature as part of Earth’s natural carbon cycle, it releases two (2) atoms of oxygen and one of carbon. The carbon is used naturally to make trees, grains, vegetables, fruits, human body tissue, …

12. Why do governments encourage burning Australian natural gas and coal exports overseas yet claim that burning the same natural gas and coal here will supposedly be catastrophic and needs to be taxed?

Royalties and taxation revenue, that’s why.

Yet Aussie power stations use some of the best technology for reducing real pollutants such as particulates and nitrous and sulphur oxides?

13. Are you aware that China, India, America and many other nations each produce far more CO2 and continue growing their production?

14. Why is the government’s imposed ‘price of carbon’ open-ended? What mechanism prevents future governments from arbitrarily raising tax rates or prices?

Australia’s GST was introduced only after amendments made it difficult for future government’s to independently raise GST rates. Remember though that when the GST was introduced most states had ALP governments. They promised to reduce specific state taxes after receiving GST funds. Although the Howard federal government did provide its promised income tax reductions, many state promises to remove taxes were broken. State taxes stayed and the GST was levied in addition. Governments broke promises, we paid.

15. How is imposing a carbon dioxide tax assigning a ‘price’ to carbon?

16. How is carbon dioxide ‘trading’ a market scheme? It’s a regulation restricting carbon dioxide production AND a huge cost levy. It’s regulation PLUS taxation.

In real markets, buyers and sellers meet to freely sell and buy goods to meet people’s real needs. Carbon dioxide ‘trading’ though, is just an auction created by government’s artificially restricting activity. It is an arbitrary control—rationing. It is anti-market.

17. Who pays for carbon dioxide taxation and ‘trading’ schemes?

End users, people who buy basic necessities and something to enjoy themselves: food, electricity, petrol, transport, housing, lighting, gas, water, heating, air-conditioning, cars, sewage disposal, entertainment, education, health services, medicines, dental care, computers, toys, holidays, travel …

18. Are you aware that as our population grows, reducing CO2 production by 5% means severe reductions per person? These will be economically devastating.

Hang on a minute:

19. If taxing carbon dioxide will make Australia more competitive, why not make the tax rate 90%?

20. Why did the government not put the tax to an election? Only after winning an election based on the GST did Costello and Howard put the GST to parliament?

21. How will this government run the largest and most complex bureaucratic wealth re-distribution scheme ever devised? How will it manage that COMBINED with complex multi-energy regulation?

The government couldn’t run a grocery price website. Attempts to insulate homes led to enormous waste and loss of lives.

22. What percentage of carbon dioxide tax revenue will be wasted in bureaucratic churn?

23. Why does government say it will compensate households when in her own introduction to breaking her promise the prime minister said it is designed to cause pain because pain changes people’s behaviour?

Then they said it wouldn’t cost low and middle-income earners. Nor export companies. Nor …

24. How can taking money from one person to give to another person change climate?

25. Why do the reasons we’ve been given for carbon dioxide taxes and ‘trading’ frequently change? Why do they conflict?

We have been given many supposed reasons for increasing the cost of basic necessities. Supposed reasons have included:

➤➤ “the greatest moral, economic and environmental challenge of our generation”;

➤➤Using our nation to provide international leadership; yet,

➤➤Following other nations supposedly already taxing and ‘trading’ carbon dioxide;

➤➤Food and water supplies facing drought; yet,

➤➤Preventing floods;

➤➤Taxation reform (So it really is about taxation);

➤➤Be more competitive (by adding a tax our foreign competitors won’t be paying!);

➤➤The environment (yet the ALP’s previous Climate Change minister, Senator Penny Wong said there’s no environmental certainty with carbon dioxide tax;

➤➤Our future (yet Earth’s atmospheric temperature has not risen since 1998);


➤➤People want it (we do not);

➤➤Green jobs (at more than double the cost);

➤➤Productivity (huh? Higher costs mean lower productivity);

➤➤Diseases, storms, natural weather events, sea levels, … ;

List of effects blamed on global warming:

Yet there is no evidence humans even influenced global temperature, much less caused it.

26. Before the election the ALP pushed a carbon dioxide ‘trading’ scheme, saying a tax was NOT the way. The PM promised NO carbon dioxide tax. Now she wants BOTH a carbon dioxide tax AND a carbon dioxide ‘trading’ scheme—why?

27. Is truth important to you?

➤➤Julia Gillard, PM, August 2010, pre-election: “there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead”

➤➤Wayne Swan, Treasurer, August, 2010, pre-election: “What we rejected is this hysterical allegation that somehow we are moving towards a carbon tax”

➤➤Senator Penny Wong, previous Climate Change minister, April, 2010 when promoting a ‘trading’ scheme: “A carbon tax is a less efficient way in the Australian government’s view of dealing with this issue”, and: “You know that you can’t have any environmental certainty with a carbon tax”

➤➤Martin Ferguson, Resources minister, said in 2007 that a carbon tax of $30 on local airline flights would: “kill the Australian aviation industry both domestically and internationally”

Answering the basic questions reveals climate policy is driven by politics. It corrupts science.

Fabricated climate alarm is driven by money and desire to control.


Contact your MP’s by phone, e-mail, fax or post and ask the question:

Your House of Reps electorate MP:
Your federal senators:

PDF can be found on : Conscious

1 comment:

  1. Some good points. I have a no carbon tax blog too...

    I am planning on adding a lot of new posts this week.