Newsletter No. 30 For 2010 From The Climate Realists Against the ETS

Hello once again Climate Realists,

Activists, Neil & Esther Henderson

Welcome once again.
Apologies for the delay in getting this newsletter out- it is a busy time of year for us on the farm, which leaves little time for computer work.
Our sympathies to network members in Canterbury, Southland and south Otago.
We trust you will be able to rebuild wherever possible, and that there will be all the help required to recover from the Canterbury quake and the recent atrocious weather further south.

From the NZ Herald:

A new survey suggests concern about climate change has slipped slightly from a year ago.

The UMR Research poll done on behalf of the Greenhouse Policy Coalition, which represents some of the larger greenhouse gas emitters, said climate change rated bottom in order of importance to people out of a list of 10 common issues – adrop from eighth out of nine issuesin the same survey last year.

Those issues in 2010 were (in order of concern) cost of living, health, education, ethics in business, environment, effect of the economy on household, taxes, employment, standard of living compared with other countries and climate change.

The proportion of people agreeing that climate change was a serious issue fell from 42.6 per cent last year to 36.3 per cent, the survey showed.

The coalition’s executive director, David Venables, said the results of the survey reinforced the Government’s decision to moderate the impact of the Emissions Trading Scheme and the need to fine-tune it to keep in step with New Zealand’s main trading partners – which lagged in implementing their own schemes – and the rest of the world.

The survey found that:

* 23.4 per cent of people agreed New Zealand should reduce its emissions, even if it meant reducing the standard of living – down from 34.9 per cent last year;

* 38 per cent disagreed that New Zealand should take part in a global emissions trading regime if it cost people $5 each a week – up from 32.1 per cent;

* 18.1 per cent agreed New Zealand should cut emissions even if it costs jobs – down from 24.3 per cent;

* 45.1 per cent agreed with the statement “controlling emissions is mostly about saving our planet – we shouldn’t be quibbling too much about money”, down from 55.9 per cent last year;

* 65.6 per cent were in favour of switching to sustainable technologies even if there was a cost – down from 78.3 per cent;

* 32.3 per cent gave a rating between six and 10 (10 being totally fair) when asked if putting a price on carbon was a fair way of reducing emissions – down from 37.9 per cent last year;

* 33.9 per cent agreed with the statement “I feel fully informed about the ETS” – up from 29.4 per cent;

* 45.8 per cent agreed that climate change was happening and caused by humans – up from 44.2 per cent;

* 32.7 per cent felt there was evidence climate change was happening, but were uncertain whether humans were the cause – down from 35.7 per cent;

* 19.3 per cent said the climate change problem effectively did not exist – up from 17.5 per cent.


Some people are sensible – even if only to save a dollar.

Pastural Farming Climate Research
Robin Grieves of  PFCR is working hard for farmers.
Below is an extract from his latest newsletter:

………….Dr Clyton Moyo who is a climate change analyst for Dairy NZ, tried to tell the group that Dairy NZ was advocating for farmers.  However, as this farmer pointed out, Dairy NZ has plenty to say on its website about livestock emissions but nowhere does it question the methodology for including and calculating the effect of methane emissions. Dairy NZ has made submissions to Government about the ETS but again it has never questioned the very questionable treatment of these emissions…………………………

………It has been a long fight and there is a long way to go and we are getting weary. But the fight is winnable and we should not allow ourselves to be worn down. The ETS will be reviewed in 2011 and we would like to get a professionally prepared report ready for it setting out the flaws in the way this ETS treats enteric methane…………

We need a lot of money for this and we would like existing members to help by getting others to join us. Please if everyone got just two or three of their friends or neighbours to join us we will have something for the review.

Get them to go to the website or print this out and give it to them. We can do this, just a little from a lot will make all the difference.

The full report may be viewed at:

We urge you to support Robin in his campaign if at all possible. Visit his website or email for more information.
Agriculture ETS Advisory Group

A collection of inter-connected parties some might consider beholden to the government have been drawn together to form a new advisory group for Agriculture Minister David Carter.
The new Agriculture Emissions Trading Scheme Advisory Group has been stocked with a collection of high-profile people, most of which have strong connections to the government in some form.
The appointments announced today led to a senior agriculture sector insider suggesting the group “smacked” of cronyism.
Heading up the new group is former National Party MP and current Food & Grocery Council chief executive Katherine Rich.
The other members are Silver Fern Farms chief executive Keith Cooper, Fonterra group quality assurance general manager Mark Leslie, New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre director Harry Clark, DairyNZ policy and advocacy general manager Simon Tucker, Foundation for Arable Research (FAR) chairman Stuart Wright, Ngai Tahu and Te Atiawa sheep and beef farmer Edward Ellison and Te Arawa Group Holdings chief executive Roger Pikia.
Silver Fern Farms is the most significant partner of new red meat initiative FarmIQ Systems, which is to receive nearly $60 million in government funding through the Primary Growth Partnership (PGP). The other partners are government-owned corporate farmer Landcorp and rural services and supplies company PGG Wrightson.
Similarly, the Greenhouse Gas Research Centre is funded through the PGP to the tune of nearly $50 million over the next 10 years.
Meanwhile DairyNZ and FAR and both funded mostly by levies imposed by government created statute.
Mr Carter said the high calibre committee would lend weight to understanding agriculture’s role in the Emissions Trading Scheme, leading up to its planned implementation in 2015.
“There is a vast body of agricultural knowledge amongst farmers, growers and industry. We need to tap into this to ensure New Zealand’s response to climate change is both appropriate and achievable.”
The group’s terms of reference describe its purpose to provide independent and objective advice to the government on the implementation of the agriculture component of the ETS.
Agriculture is said to contribute about half of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions.
“Specifically, the group will advise the government on technical issues such as emissions factors, measurement and reporting and the point of obligation,” Mr Carter said.
Emissions submissions call.
Agricultural processors are being invited to make submissions on how they can reduce their greenhouse gas emissions or help suppliers reduce theirs.
Processors such as dairy factories, meat processors and fertiliser works are the point of obligation under the Government’s emissions trading scheme for agriculture, but there has been criticism that this was too far removed to influence farmer behaviour.
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Policy climate-change manager Julie Collins said that unless that behaviour could be tracked and monitored, it could not be verified, at least with present technology.

There has therefore been a tradeoff, with the decision made to make the point of obligation with 250 agricultural processors instead of between 30,000 and 40,000 individual farmers.

Read further at:

Michael Coren with Dr Tim Ball
This is really worth watching – all parts, and recommending it to others.
What is even more worth watching is an interview between Michael Coren and Monckton which is available from the list which follows the Ball interview.

Note particularly Monckton’s explanation of the resulting re-radiation!


Hi Esther, here’s an interesting article.  Global Cooling was on the agenda of the June Bilderberg meeting.
Wonder what they talked about!


FYI – for any who may be interested – contribution to Delingpole thread, qv
JD and contributors to the thread will recall that, having for years assumed a role as principal lickspittle to the AGW scam community, the Royal Society was forced some months ago to announce that it was having to re-evaluate its position. It did so under pressure from a cadre of 43 of its own Fellows, who were finally no longer willing to tolerate blatant misrepresentation/corruption of climate change science.


From the Global Warming Policy foundation:

Green Cuts: British Climate Department Faces Chop
[Britain’s] climate department is under threat from the Treasury which wants to swallow it up. Climate change secretary Chris Huhne is fighting to defend his department’s funding and independence, fending off a suggestion that his civil servants should be moved to the Treasury to cut costs… Officials at Decc told ministers that [40%] cuts to its £3.2bn budget would make it unable to stand alone as a viable entity. –Allegra Stratton, James Randerson and Polly Curtis, The Guardian, 22 September 2010
If all this sounds like pure lunacy, we must recall that two years ago, our MPs voted all but unanimously for the Climate Change Act. This commits Britain, uniquely in the world, to cutting its CO2 emissions by 80 per cent by 2050, at a cost of up to £18 billion a year, or £734 billion in total. This is what our politicians have made the law of the land, although in practice it could only be achieved by closing down virtually all our economy. –- Christopher Booker, The Sunday Telegraph, 19 September 2010

Visit the link above for the rest of this article, or to subscribe to GWPF newsletters visit


Cassandra Says It Will Get Very Cold


Feel free to use it if you wish.
All the best
This (letter BLO) roughly coincides with ‘my’ figures for NZ, which are:
.03%     CO2 in atmosphere
.3%       CO2 we are told we ‘contribute’.  It can’t be figured it out – as Labour proved.
So:  .03x.3×1% =  .00009.   That is so close to zero as to be irrelevant.  To say nothing of ‘margins for error’.
BUT we may photosynthesize ALL of our .3%.  Who knows?  We plant many more things than most countries but we are only ‘allowed’ to factor in forests.  How crude is that ‘science’?
In every 2,600 molecules of air, only one is CO2. Of the CO2 molecules only one in 33 is produced by humans. Thus, in every 85,800 molecules of air only one is a molecule of CO2 produced by humans. That this can warm Earth is nonsense. That the UN IPCC and the federal government want us to believe that in every 85,800 molecules of air, a single CO2 molecule produced by humans warms the planet yet the other 32 produced by Nature does not is insane.
Malcolm Roberts
Pullenvale Qld
January 9th, 2010


Greenpeace produces a propaganda video to perpetuate the myth of global
warming. Everything this child reads from the teleprompter is a lie. You
need to know how the forces of deceit are working to capture the minds
of unsuspecting children – and adults. [The bright side of this is the
reader-comment section that shows how many people are aware of the
global-warming swindle and are not fooled by this propaganda.] YouTube
Posted 2007 Sep 11

Once more, Greenpeace shows its true colours.
This child shows no love or caring for his fellow man and the
environment, instead using thinly veiled threats to force others to
conform to his brainwashed state. Or else!!!
Thank you Greenpeace for once again warning us of your true position as
an integral part of the New World Order dictatorship. Chilling!


An even worse video (No Pressure) which I don’t recommend to anyone has also recently been produced by the 10:10 global organisation.
It depicts various groups of people being encouraged to make some kind of contribution to the 10:10 project (cutting our carbon 10% a year, starting in 2010), with those who don’t want to contribute being graphically blown up.
Many of our readers may have already seen it, and graphic images from it are depicted at the link below. There has been a massive backlash against the makers of this clip, for such vulgar and tasteless propaganda.

Hi  folk ,
Don’t know whether you have caught up with this yet ?  Many of those with scientific degrees , display an arrogance not usually seen in previous generations . The C.R.U team and their U.S.  allies exemplify the worst  I have come across . Many in the U.N.  senior management, are also obviously playing their own advantage game.
Suggest you google  ”  uk investigation completely debunks global warming science ”    40,000 pounds was a nice little lift for  Oxburgh for  a 5 day  round the table talk . It would be good to know how much in grants has been gifted to  N.Z.  scientists to investigate the production of biofuels ?  Early this year I heard that  $56 million was put aside for that purpose .  Previously, a couple of other companies had been given rather substantial  amounts , What has N.Z. got in return ?
Malcolm  R.

As more and more climate studies are discredited, the remaining data need to be fudged more and more in order to make the Watermelons’ equations come out right. So, as long as you raise the temperature of one of the US’s Great Lakes to 221°C, you don’t have to change any of your conclusions.

Scott J

—–Original Message—–
From: John
To: Viscount Monckton
Sent: Sat, Sep 11, 2010 12:47 am
Greetings Your Lordship
Our national newspaper the NZ Herald, which professes to be ‘green’ but is invariably mostly garbage, has two pages of self-serving tripe today from Lord Stern.   You can google it at ‘www NZ Herald Lord Stern’.
Perhaps a short response to the editor from you might ‘spoil their day’ ?
We have no lords here!
Best wishes
John C

From: The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley
Sent: Saturday, 11 September 2010 16:08 p.m.
To: Letters to the Editor – The New Zealand Herald;
Subject: Lord Stern – profiteer of doom

Sir, – Lord Stern (September 11) menaces New Zealand with “trade barriers” unless she agrees to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide. This rank neo-imperialism, overlaid with overtly Marxist rhetoric about “market failure”, should be treated with contempt.
Stern’s ludicrous report on the economics of climate change reached its erroneous conclusions on the basis of an insupportable near-zero discount rate and an indefensible doubling of the IPCC’s wildest projections of future CO2-induced warming.
The IPCC’s estimates of climate sensitivity to CO2 are now known to be prodigious exaggerations. At most, we shall see not 3-4 Celsius degrees of warming this century, but a harmless 1-2 degrees. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is a naturally-occurring trace gas that was once present at 750 times its present atmospheric concentration – yet here we all are.
Stern’s demand that New Zealand should shut down 90% of her carbon-fuelled economy over the next 50 years is scientifically baseless. His spurious justifications for dubious “investments” of British taxpayers’ money in fashionable but hopeless boondoggles have bankrupted the United Kingdom. Do not let him wreck your economy too. – Monckton of Brenchley
The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley
Carie, Rannoch, Scotland, PH17 2QJ


The New Zealand Climate Change Centre

invites you to attend a one-day workshop in Wellington on Monday 6 December 2010 that will focus on the social science issues around climate change.

The aim of this workshop is to help facilitate dialogue between social and bio-physical scientists (and any other interested individuals) to identify the potential role of the New Zelaand social science community and the research gaps in relation to climate change.

For more information regarding this workshop, including details of how to register, view the workshop webpage  link below.


New Zealand Climate Change Centre
c/o NIWA
Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie
Wellington 6241


Global warming could be a thing of the past, thanks to the Barack Obama administration.

No, the White House has not single-handedly managed to stop the apparent rising temperature – but it does think the terminology oversimplifies the problem.

According to U.S. science adviser John Holdren, the public should start using the phrase ‘global climate disruption’ because it makes the situation sound more dangerous.

During a speech in Oslo, Norway, Mr Holdren said global warming is a ‘dangerous misnomer’ and is not an accurate description of the issues facing the planet.

Fox News recently reported White House Science Advisor John Holden was urging people to cease using the phrase “global warming” and instead use “global climate disruption.” Rather than acknowledge that the completely discredited global warming industry was headed out to intellectual sea with the rest of the political sewage, President Barack Obama was resorting to the timeworn trick of repackaging an old product.


Britain’s Energy Policy Is In Crisis

Forget the latest proposal by Caroline Spelman, our Environment Secretary, that all hospitals should in future be built on hills, to stop them being submerged beneath the rising seas brought by global warming (even that serial panic-monger Al Gore predicts that sea levels will rise by only 20 feet). A more serious problem is the chaos inflicted on our energy policy by our willing compliance with an EU obligation to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 34 per cent within 10 years.

Behind the fog of official spin, it becomes ever more obvious that the schemes devised to meet the EU target of generating nearly a third of our energy from renewable sources by 2020 – six times more than at present – are a massive self-delusion. Even though they will cost us hundreds of billions of pounds, paid largely through soaring electricity bills, the energy they produce will be derisory – certainly nowhere near enough to plug the looming 40 per cent shortfall in our supplies, as many of our older power stations are forced to close.

Take the Government’s proposed Renewable Heat Incentive, the costs of which could, by 2030, outweigh its benefits by as much as £13 billion. The hope is that by 2020, Britain will have installed two million “heat pumps” to extract warmth from the air and soil. But a taxpayer-funded study by the Energy Saving Trust found that, of 83 air-sourced systems already installed at up to £20,000 each, only one was efficient enough to qualify as “renewable energy”. This was so embarrassing that many of the higher figures have been given as estimates to provide a more reassuring picture.

Read full article at:


China’s installed power generation capacity:
Hi Esther,
Recently you commented on how anti-human the environmental movement is. You’re right on target, and if anyone doubts how far some of them will go, the words of Pentti Linkola should remove all doubt.
An ETS, once fully implemented, will drive any country adopting it into destitution, but it must be understood as only a part of an agenda to reduce population and control all resources and food production. Here’s an example from across the ditch about what happens when farmers dares to question climate change orthodoxy. What a tragedy that that family left America only to go from the frying pan into the fire!
Even worse are the Draconian controls over local food production now being erected in the United States. Please have your readers take note of Senate bill S.510, which is coming up again in the US Congress. This is part of the WTO and Codex Alimentarius agenda. The good news is that strong opposition may be enough to kill the bill, but what does it say about the intention of the legislators and the obsequious approval of the press? The ONLY thing that can stop these people is an informed public standing together and saying NO!
It’s already happening in America, with dawn raids on Amish farms for selling raw milk and a recent $5000 fine on a Georgia farmer for growing more food than his household could use—organic-farmer-fined-5000-for-growing-crops-on-own-land.
Yes, there are powerful moneyed interests behind the so-called environmental movement, but I have to believe that 99% of those involved in it (other than those miscreants at the top) have no idea of the kind of evil they unwittingly support. It would go a long way to wake up even a few of them. Interesting that you hardly hear a peep about the biggest environmental catastrophe of our time in the Gulf of Mexico, yet we have to pay a carbon tax for pooping sheep!
Best Regards,


Support those who support Climate Realists:
Climate Realists have thus far produced a range of bumper stickers and a climate change information pamphlet.
These have been funded largely by ourselves, with a few donations from CR Network members.
We are very fortunate that one of our members, Alan, has kindly been doing the printing at cost price and the graphic design free of charge.
Alan has now made an even better offer which could be a win-win for everyone.
If you or any acquaintances are print purchasers and purchase printed material from his company then part of the sale price will be credited towards printing for Climate Realists. His printing prices are extremely good ones and you can check out prices and products at and even send for a full colour price book.
All you need to do is send your orders to and you will be helping us to combat the ETS.
The more people you refer to Alan for printing the more we can afford to distribute the facts on climate change.


Q: Doctor,  I’ve heard that  cardiovascular exercise can prolong life. Is this true?
A: Your  heart is only good for so many  beats, and that’s it…  don’t waste them on exercise. Everything wears out  eventually.  Speeding up your heart will not make you live longer; that’s like saying you can extend  the life of your car by driving it faster.  Want to live longer?  Take a  nap.

Q: Should  I cut  down on meat and  eat more fruits and  vegetables?
A: You  must grasp  logistical efficiencies.  What does a cow eat?   Hay and corn.   And what are these?  Vegetables.  So a steak  is nothing more  than an efficient mechanism of  delivering vegetables to your  system.   Need grain?   Eat  chicken.   Beef is also a good source  of field grass  (green leafy vegetable).   And a pork chop can  give you  100% of your recommended daily allowance of  vegetable  products.

Q: Should  I reduce my  alcohol intake?
A:  No,  not at all.  Wine is made from  fruit.  Brandy is  distilled wine,  that means they take the water out of  the fruity bit so you  get even more of the goodness that  way.   Beer is also made out  of grain.  Bottoms   up!

Q: How  can I calculate my body/fat   ratio?
A: Well,  if you have a body and you have  fat, your ratio is one  to one.  If you have two bodies, your  ratio is two to  one, etc.

Q: What  are some of  the advantages of participating in a regular  exercise  program?
A: Can’t  think of a single one, sorry.  My  philosophy is: No  Pain…Good!

Q:  Aren’t  fried  foods bad for you?
A:  YOU’RE  NOT  LISTENING!!! …..  Foods are fried these days in  vegetable oil.  In fact,  they’re permeated in it.  How could  getting more  vegetables be bad for  you?

Q:  Will  sit-ups  help prevent me from getting a little soft  around  the middle?
A: Definitely  not! When  you exercise a muscle, it gets bigger. You  should only be  doing sit-ups if you want a bigger   stomach.

Q:  Is   chocolate bad for me?
A:  Are   you crazy? HELLO   Cocoa  beans ! Another vegetable!!! It’s the best feel-good food around!

Q:  Is   swimming good for your figure?
A:  If   swimming is good for  your figure,   explain whales to  me.

Q:  Is getting   in-shape important for my   lifestyle?
A:  Hey!  ‘Round’ is  a shape!

Well,   I hope this has cleared up any misconceptions you may   have had about  food   and diets.

And  remember:
‘Life should  NOT  be a journey to the grave with the intention of  arriving  safely in an attractive and well preserved  body, but rather  to skid in sideways – Chardonnay in one  hand – chocolate in  the other – body thoroughly used up,  totally worn out and   screaming ‘WOO  HOO, What a  Ride’

For  those of you who watch what you eat, here’s the final  word on nutrition and health. It’s a relief to know the  truth after all those conflicting nutritional  studies.

1. The Japanese eat  very little fat
and suffer  fewer heart attacks than  Americans.

2. The Mexicans  eat a lot of  fat
and suffer fewer heart attacks than  Americans.

3. The Chinese  drink very little  red wine
and  suffer fewer heart attacks than  Americans.

4. The  Italians drink a lot of red  wine
and suffer fewer heart attacks than  Americans.

5. The Germans  drink a lot of beers and eat lots of  sausages and fats
and suffer fewer heart attacks than   Americans.


Eat  and drink what you like.
Speaking  English is apparently what kills  you.

About Clare Swinney

Interested in what is genuinely going on, not in the disinformation promoted as "truth" by the corrupt mainstream media. Please keep an open mind and do your own research. M.Sc. (Hons) from Auckland University. If you came to this site via the 'Silly Beliefs' disinformation website, please read my response to their article at the link:
This entry was posted in Global Warming Hoax, NZ Climate Realists Against The ETS. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Newsletter No. 30 For 2010 From The Climate Realists Against the ETS

  1. Brian says:

    Wellington just got a carbon Zombie for mayor, she rode to work on her bike with 350.orgs emblem on the front handle bars. Yay for zombies.

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 )

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