Newsletter No. 11 For 2010 From the NZ Climate Realists Against the ETS

Neil & Esther Henderson (

Activists, Neil & Esther Henderson

Sent: Friday, 19 March 2010 8:16:47 p.m.

Greetings Climate Realists,
A rather long newsletter this time- enjoy at your leisure. Thanks for all the contributions; I have put (or will put) a number of them on our website since this newsletter can’t take them all.
Happy reading,
Neil and Esther
Advertise us…. bumper stickers…. pamphlets…..
Thank you to those who have ordered bumper stickers and pamphlets so far- they went out in today’s mail so you should (hopefully) receive them early next week.
We still have eight different bumper stickers available- just send your postal address to us at if you would like any.
We also have “Climate Change- what is really happening” available as a pamphlet- let us know if you’d like any.
***************FARM IMPACT STATEMENTS********************
To all farmers,
The ETS legislation WILL affect you- as of July this year when electricity rises by 5% and fuel prices rise by around 3c/litre. (These rises are capped until the end of 2012 at which time they will go to the open market price which at present is double that)
The legislation will affect you even more in 2015 when agriculture is brought into the scheme.
Do you have any idea what it will cost you?
Do you know how to calculate this?
There appears to be no clear way at this stage to work out a single definite figure of your costs, due to all the variables, eg carbon price, intensity etc but the carbon calculator at will help give you an idea.
Act MP John Boscawen is deeply concerned about the ETS and the impact it will have on New Zealand’s economy.
He would like to present in Parliament a selection of ‘farm impact statements’ from New Zealand farmers who are prepared to stand up and be counted against this legislation.
We are asking you to provide us with the following details:
*A brief background of your farm- type, size, history (eg family farm for x years)
*The ETS costs involved for you (as far as you are able to tell- use the carbon calculator above)
*The impact these costs will have on you, your family, your farming operation
*The flow-on affects these costs will have to your community, your livestock firms, your trucking companies, your fertiliser companies etc etc.
NOTE: Before John reads something out in Parliament, or tables something that identifies the person, we need their permission for him to do so.
If you are happy for John to identify you in Parliament, please email your farm impact statement to us at as soon as you are able!
John Boscawen would like to read one of these out every day. He will table whatever he is not given the opportunity to read…….
Your help would be very much appreciated. Please circulate this widely among the farming community.
Statements may be emailed to us at
Dear Neil and Esther.
Thank you for your recent newsletter in which you outline some of your efforts to make politicians and their “advisors” see reason. Still an upward climb, it seems!
While our numbers may be small I think that it is appropriate to encourage our members to consider direct personal political action – the issue is that important. I would not presume to tell other members how to vote – that is up to them – but I would suggest that the possibility of losing seats in Parliament might improve the hearing and attention of those who are supposed to govern in our interests.
I will personally not give my vote to any political party which supports the ETS scheme and/or the other little lurks which would increase the cost of living or diminish New Zealand’s sovereignty.
Another option is the nomination of independent Members of Parliament whose first priority would be to protect and promote the interests of the local voters. These would need to be people of integrity and character able to communicate the fallacies of the global warming alarmists.
We know what is going to happen as the time of the next election draws near. The politicians will suddenly develop an interest in the concerns of the citizens and practically beg you for your party vote. However, they need to get a clear message before this occurs, “If you can’t or won’t listen to the people then don’t expect our political or financial support for your Party.”
Some political tough love is in order, I believe. How each member applies it is up to him or her.
Yours sincerely
Competitive Enterprise Institute attorney Chris Horner, having clawed at Hansen’s beast for two years – is now getting to the bottom of the fraud….excellent video:

Interview with Chris Horner, author of ‘Red Hot Lies’
Hi to you both ,
I don’t know if this will work , but maybe  a nursery story regarding the present rediculous government situation , or thinking, may awaken  a little thought  and/ or mirth.Do you know anyone who may be able to write a humorous story about climate change/ global warming , or whatever.
i.e.    Once upon a time there were 3 evil scientists who decided to fool the world and earn millions/billions of dollars from the unsuspecting population.   The foolish leaders of the country were soon  convinced that they must save all the people before the sky fell in . They employed hundreds of people to help save the people , but as it grew, the taxes increased and so the gvt.  had to raise more taxes .
I’m sure you get the idea and may be able to find someone to write such a nonsense.  Sent to present members who send it to 3 more it would soon get around .
I am sure the local paper is resisting writing our stories as I have 3 or 4 in the pipeline .  The local M.P. (Jo  Goodhew ) had quite a space yesterday . All the tired old global warming  crap.  A local  greenie also piped in about oil peaking .  All living in the past and with firmly closed minds .
Best wishes ,   Malcolm
75 good reasons
This is a very good summary

I reckon, without much work we could get to 101 reasons (or more)

Solar Panels – another Silly Roof Scheme.
The Carbon Sense Coalition today called for the immediate suspension of another of Mr Garrett’s silly roof schemes – the Roof Solar Panel Scheme.
“This scheme is driven by the Renewable Energy Target Scheme, Renewable Energy Certificates and obligations on power companies to buy the inconsistent dribbles of electricity produced by solar panels on domestic homes.”
The Chairman of Carbon Sense, Mr Viv Forbes, said that like the roof insulation scheme, the Roof Solar Panel Scheme was dangerous, ill planned and a massive waste of community funds.
Question 4 in the House- Tues 16th March

4.    JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Minister of Research, Science and Technology:

Is NIWA’s principal climate scientist Dr Brett Mullan correct when he says in relation to NIWA’s Seven Station Temperature Series that NIWA “had the original data, knew the method of calculations, and we have the answers”, and will he require NIWA to release the method of calculations and the actual calculations, commonly known as a Schedule of Adjustments, which would allow independent scientists to replicate NIWA’s results?

Watch the interchange at:


China- NO!
China has no intention of capping its greenhouse gas
emissions even as authorities are committed to realizing the nation’s
target to reduce carbon intensity through new policies and measures,
the country’s top climate change negotiators said yesterday.
The negotiators also warned that rich and developing countries have
little hope of overcoming key disagreements over how to fight global
Henk Tennekes- he was right after all.
Gagged! Thrown out on the street! In the nineties, HenkTennekes was made to
clear his desk and resign as Director of the KNMI (Dutch Meteorological Institute).
His sin? In a newspaper column the world-renowned meteorologist had disproved all the bold claims about climate change.
‘Global warming’: time to get angry
By James Delingpole Politics Last updated: February 23rd, 2010

Heroic, monotesticular UKIP MEP Nigel Farage was bumped off the BBC Question Time panel at the
last minute last week. Shame. That particular edition was broadcast from Middlesbrough and it
would have been fascinating to hear the audience’s response to the choice things he was
planning to say about the closure of their local steelworks.

Here is how he describes it in a letter:
Corus’ steelworks at Redcar, near Middlesbrough, “Teesside Cast Products”, is to be closed
(“mothballed” is the euphemism). It is Britain’s last great steelworks and an essential national
resource. Without it, we are at the world’s mercy.
Corus is owned by Tata Steel of India.
Recently, Tata received “EU-carbon-credits” worth up to £1bn, ostensibly so that steel-production
at Redcar would not be crippled by the EU’s “carbon-emissions-trading-scheme”. By closing the
plant at Redcar – and not making any “carbon-emissions” – Tata walks off with £1bn of
taxpayers’ money, which it will invest in its steel-factories in India, where there is no
There’s more.  The EU’s “emissions-trading-scheme” (ETS) is modelled on
instructions from the “International Panel on Climate-Change” (IPCC) of the United Nations
Organisation. The Chairman of the IPCC is one Dr Rajendra K.Pachauri, a former railway-engineer,
who obtained this post by virtue of his being Chairman of the “Tata Energy-Research Institute”
– set up by Tata Steel.
UKIP’s leader in the EU’s “parliament”, Nigel Farage, revealed these data in a speech at
Strasbourg, on 10th February, and was due to appear in the BBC’s “Question-Time” programme,
from Middlesbrough, on 18th February, where the closure of the Redcar-plant was inevitably
discussed.  Almost at the last minute, his invitation to join the “Question-Time” panel was
cancelled, without explanation.
An article, on the subject, by Neil Hamilton, which was due to appear in this week’s Sunday
Express, has also been “pulled”.
Yours etc
The Corus scandal has been covered before, of course, by Booker, North et al. What bothers me,
though, is how remarkably little traction it has had in the MSM. The sums of taxpayers money being
squandered are stupendous; the pointlessness of the exercise beyond all reason; yet somehow – a
bit like the fact that thanks to EU regulations
on landfill waste disposal we’re now all supposed to put up with having our stinking, rat-infested
trash collected just once a fortnight – it’s being treated as yet another of those government
impositions about which we’re merely supposed to shrug our shoulders and tamely accept as just
another of those things.
The mighty Booker reported on another example of this at the weekend. Gordon Brown has secretly
blown another £60 million of taxpayer’s money the nation can ill-afford to spend on “buying carbon
credits from the Third World for the use of government buildings and other official purposes
– so that our civil servants can continue to benefit from the CO2 emissions needed to keep
their offices warm and lit.”
To acquaint yourself with the full grisly details read it here. Alternatively, just torture
yourself gently by reading the conclusion: Thus we pay billions of dollars to the Asian
countries for the right to continue emitting CO2 and other greenhouse gases here in the West,
including the £60 million contributed by British taxpayers to keep our civil servants warm. As a
result we enrich a small number of people in China and India, including Maurice Strong, who
now lives in exile in Beijing, having been caught out in 2005 for illicitly receiving $1 million
from Saddam Hussein in the “Oil for Food” scandal. He played a key part in setting up
China’s carbon exchange, to buy and sell the CDM credits administered by the UNFCCC – of which
Strong himself was the chief architect.
The net result of all this trading and jiggery-pokery is that, after billions of pounds
and dollars have changed hands, with a hefty commission for those bankers and other carbon
traders along the way, there is no reduction in greenhouse gas emissions whatever. But at least
our political class can continue to work in warm offices and fly righteously round the world on
our behalf – while the rest of us foot the bill.
Meanwhile our prospective next prime minister David Cameron has come up with a whizzo new
scheme to make our inflated electricity bills even more painful than before:
He said: ” We need to apply gentle social pressure on people to bring down their energy use.
“So just as they’re doing in California, we will make each energy bill come with an illustration
of how much energy people’s neighbours are using in comparison to their own usage, inspiring them
to consume less in competition.”
The Booker is right. With honorable exceptions – such as UKIP and, on the environment at least,
the BNP – our political class seem to have absolutely no understanding of the grotesque
injustices being inflicted on their electorate in the name of the non-existent threat of “Climate
What will it take, I wonder, for these imbeciles to wake up and smell the coffee? Will a hung
Parliament do? Or will it have to be bloody revolution?
I do get angry when I read and hear of such things yet John Boscawen appears
to be the only MP prepared to speak out on the issue.
Can I suggest the following –  A letter to the Editor from different people
asking Key or  Smith whether they are aware of the Tata steel situation and
the Pachauri association and seek a public response from each of them. It
takes a week or so but they usually respond. A no comment is damming of
We need to force them to state their view publicly — all the time, as
each new outrage occurs as they will-
cheers Gerry
Dear Neil and Esther

I’m sure Lord Monckton is giving many of the climate change alarmists some sleepless nights. It’s also good to see that there are some strong critical voices of this scam in the Australian. (newspaper)

In one of the videos you provided there was reference to a letter Lord Monckton sent to Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. For those interested the full text of this letter can be viewed on the Web:
Type in Lord Monckton’s Letter to Kevin Rudd on the Google Home Page

Click on the Agmates site – probably second from top.

Click on the Watts Up With That reference.

Did Kevin Rudd respond to Lord Monckton’s letter? Hell no – did an Al Gore – ran for cover.

Best wishes.
Denis McCarthy

A Comment from Peter – NZCPR.
“The NZ Cabinet is currently looking for ways to back away from this AGW ( Anthropomorhic Global Warming) poison chalice.
Unfortunately there are members within the Cabinet who have nailed their political colours to the AGW mast and will no doubt go down with the AGW ‘ship’ still claiming that they were misquoted !
Many ‘progressive’ members of the
Key administration’s  Cabinet have an agenda very different from the simple arguments about AGW. Their covert agenda is about U.N. sponsored governance, a roll back in local democracy and rule by an international self appointed elite. They will not go into the night quietly and will mount a fierce rear guard action.
When the final whimpers from these
Cabinet Ministers dies away, immediately begin listening for the next ‘global emergency’ scenario that will become the vehicle to advance their elite world agenda. WE have some very nasty pieces of elitist fascist rubbish in ALL political parties and eternal vigilence is the only remedy to their continuing Progressive leftist and fascist machinations.
— Peter. “
Link to page from “The New Zealand Week”

Extract from that page

An independent board of scientists will be appointed to review the workings of the world’s top climate science panel, which has faced recriminations over inaccuracies in a 2007 report. The board’s work will be part of a broader review of the body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC has been under fire since it was pointed out that the 2007 report included a prediction that Himalayan glaciers would vanish by 2035, although there was no scientific consensus to that effect. One area to be examined is whether the panel should incorporate so-called gray literature, a term to describe non-peer-reviewed science, in its reports. Many scientists say such material, from reports by government agencies to respected research not published in scientific journals, is crucial to a complete picture of climate science.The New York Times

i.e. – non-scientific reports from ‘greenies’ and pollies must be included as a crucial part of the overall picture ………

Any examples for Richard??
Hi Richard
our great Prime minister here in New Zealand has just set  up unit to study agricultural so called green house gas to spend 50 million NZ over three years . Here in NZ the Government is borrowing 250 million a week to pay the bills . West Coast of our South Island needs new hospital. Been told by same PM no way ,what a corrupt and useless prick  ,
cheers Brian


It’s an international disease!  The less money they have, the faster they seem to want to waste it.  If you can point me to any NZ databases with specific details of GW spending, it would be helpful.  I want to build up the global spending to at least $100 billion!
If you have an example for Richard email to us at and we’ll forward it along to him.

Hello Neil and Esther,
Your latest newsletter is good. However, vested interests in carbon trading, people who want to tax other people without their consent so they can spend their money for their own use, people not admitting their error or fraud, etc., are all reasons that the ETS and carbon trading will proceed unless we continue to make loud noises, reveal the error and fraud, and tell as many people as we can.
I’m forwarding to you (below) another Creation Research newsletter, Item 17. is a good one on a survey of views held by people in Britain; they’re coming round to good sense, warming is not man made, there may not be any warming, etc. But the reason for these changes is (mainly) not climategate or other revelations of fraud or manipulation.
There are other items in Evidence News that support the climate realists views.
17. COOLING RESPONSE TO GLOBAL WARMING, according an article in BBC News 7 Feb

2010. On 3rd and 4th February a British survey organisation named Populus carried out a survey

of opinions on global warming. This was compared with a similar survey from November 2009.

They found there has been a rapid DECREASE in the number of people who believe in man-made

global warming – from 41 percent to 26 percent. The number of climate sceptics is on the rise.

Those who believed that climate change was happening, but has not been proven to be caused by

man, increased from 32 percent to 38 percent; and those who believed “climate change is

happening, but it is environmentalist propaganda that it is manmade” increased from 8 to 10

percent. There was even an increase in people who believe that climate change is not happening:

from 15 to 25 percent.

The survey also showed that one third of the people who agreed that climate change was

happening believed “the potential consequences of living in a warming world had been

exaggerated”. This was an increase from one in five in Nov 2009.

For full survey results see:

Michael Simmonds, managing director of Populus, commented to BBC News: “It is very unusual

indeed to see such a dramatic shift in opinion in such a short period.” He went on to say: “The

British public are sceptical about man’s contribution to climate change – and becoming more so.

More people are now doubters than firm believers.” Professor Bob Watson, chief scientific adviser

to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said the results were “very

disappointing”. He told BBC news: “The fact that there has been a very significant drop in the

number of people that believe that we humans are changing the Earth’s climate is serious. Action

is urgently needed.” He went on to warn: “We need the public to understand that climate change is

serious so they will change their habits and help us move towards a low carbon economy.”

In between the two surveys there have been numerous stories of flawed climate science, but these

did not appear to be the main reason for the change. Only 57 percent of people were aware of the

bad science stories and 73% of these said the bad science stories had not changed their views

about the risks of climate change. Michael Simmonds said that it was very unusual for single

events to have a dramatic impact on public opinion. He commented: “People tend to make

judgements over time based on a whole range of different sources.”

ED. COM. Although only 57 percent of people said they knew of the flawed science stories full

survey results show 83 percent said they heard stories about the record cold UK winter but the

survey did not ask if these stories made people change their minds. People may not know what

makes for good science, but they do know if they are cold, and it is unlikely they will want

politicians to pass laws that increase the cost of keeping warm. Whatever has made people

change their opinion, it seems the more strident the govt climate warnings, the more people think

science and Govt claims are exaggerated. The climategate e-mails and the false claims made by

the IPCC indicate there are more stories of flawed science to come. The really worrying thing is

that people may lose their respect for real science and lose interest in doing the things that can be

done about environment. (Ref. weather, politics, public opinion)



About Clare Swinney

Interested in what is really going on, not that promoted as "truth" by the corrupt mainstream media.
This entry was posted in Global Warming Hoax, New Zealand, NZ Climate Realists Against The ETS. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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