Open Letter to Climate Change Minister Nick Smith

From retired climate scientist Dr Gerrit van der Lingen, of Christchurch
16 October 2009

Dear Nick

I am very disappointed about your actions in your global warming portfolio. You heard my two lectures on this subject at the Summer Sounds Symposia of 2003 and 2006. Because there is no scientific evidence whatsoever that human greenhouse gas emissions are causing catastrophic global warming, thousands of scientists consider this the biggest scam in human history. My wife Marianne and I last talked to you at the pre-dinner drinks at the Annual Conference of Architectural Designers last year. We discussed global warming and you said that you agreed with me. Your actions prove the opposite.

You are a scientist and should therefore be able to evaluate the science. But you are also a politician and obviously see political advantage in pushing the global warming dogma. This is sad, but then, you are one of many politicians worldwide who support this ideology. There are few politicians who dare to stand up against this madness. One prominent one is Vaclav Klaus, the president of the Czech Republic . He correctly sees this global mass hysteria as a major threat to democratic freedoms. He even wrote a book, title Blue Planet in Green Shackles.

Warmaholics like to say that there is consensus among scientists about dangerous man-made global warming. This is a blatant lie. Only recently, 32,000 American scientists, among them more than 9,000 PhDs, signed a petition to Congress in which they expressed serious doubt about the science behind the dogma. About $80 billion dollars have been spent in the past decade on climate research. No wonder many scientists cannot withstand the lure of the global warming gravy train. Generous research grants, travel to many conferences in exotic places, etc. The Americans call them rent-seekers.

Your support of this scam is bound to backfire on you. There are many signs that the bubble is bursting. The planet has been cooling for the last decade. Peer-reviewed publications are suggesting that we may be in for a cooling period that could last several decades. This has caused warmaholics to panic. They are reacting shriller and shriller. Propaganda temperatures have increased substantially in the lead-up to the Copenhagen conference.

Real-world data (NOT computer models) indicating cooling are: (1) the sun has been exceptionally quiet. Most of the time there are no sunspots at all. The sun is quieter than it has been in a hundred years. (2) The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has entered its cool phase. The PDO alternates between warm and cool periods, each lasting about 25 to 30 years. (3) The oceans have been cooling. This information comes from the 3000 ARGO floats scattered over all the oceans and seas that measure continuously the water temperatures up to 2000 metres depth, (4) Sea-ice cover around Antarctica has been the largest since satellite measurements began, (5) summer Arctic sea-ice cover was lowest in 2007. Since than it has increased again. Last summer saw 500,000 square km more sea-ice than in 2007.

Signs are that it is very unlikely that a global agreement on a successor of the Kyoto Protocol will be reached in Copenhagen. So why are you pushing to get the ETS bill passed before Copenhagen? Why are you boasting that New Zealand will be the first to include agriculture in the ETS bill? Saying that ruminant methane emissions account for half our GHG emissions and should be reduced is a travesty of reality and science. I wrote an article on ruminant emissions for the farmer’s magazine Country Wide. You can find it here:
www.climatescience.org.nz/images/PDFs/ruminantsno tkyotovillains.pdf

You may also be interested in an article I recently wrote for the magazine Energy NZ. I attach a copy.

How much a threat to democracy the scam is, is shown by the undue haste you are trying to ram through this ETS bill. But especially the farce of submissions to the Select Committee and now the present insulting haste to give people a chance to make oral submissions to the Finance & Expenditure Select Committee. Shame on you!

We have tried to wake up people to the consequences of this draconian ETS Bill, which is not much better than Labour’s one. I am disappointed that for instance the Maoris are only now waking up to what the ETS bill will do to their extensive forest holdings. They can’t say that they were not warned. Last year I appeared twice on Vapi Kupenga’s Auckland Maori talk-back show, Twice I warned Maori about the detrimental effects of the ETS bill on their well-being, and especially on their forest holdings. The only reaction I got was praise from Titiwhai Hariwera.

I will finish by putting a challenge to you. Recently an authoritative and definitive answer to the IPCC 2007 report was published in the US. The hefty, 868-page tome, titled Climate Change Reconsidered, was written by the NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change). It reads easily and every argument and statement is backed up by references to the peer-reviewed literature. They looked at the same publications used by the IPCC, PLUS many peer-reviewed papers ignored by the IPCC because they did not fit in with their dogma. The IPCC is a political UN organization. They are not a neutral scientific organization. They are blatant advocates of the catastrophic man-made global warming dogma. Their only “proof” is non-validated computer models and gut-feelings. I challenge you, as a scientist, to read this book (you can order it from Amazon.com) and come back to me explaining where you disagree with it (in case you do), and explain why.

With kind regards

Dr Gerrit van der Lingen

Later note from Dr van der Lingen:

I received the following answer from his private secretary, Corisha Brain, dated 20 October:

Dear Gerrit van der Lingen
On behalf of the Hon. Dr Nick Smith, Minister for Climate Change Issues, I acknowledge receipt of your email, received 16-Oct-09, regarding the ETS.

Consideration is currently being given to the matters you raise in your letter and you may expect a reply at the Minister’s earliest opportunity.
Yours Sincerely

Corisha Brain
Private Secretary – Climate Change

It is now 18 November and I am still waiting for Nick Smith’s reply. I don’t expect one.

© Scoop Media

Public Address Link:
A (Sweary) Analysis Of Urgency Abuse And
The Consititution

Keith Ng: You’re looking at the Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) for the Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill. Basically, the courts said that the Government had to pay family members who looked after people with disabilities (because not doing so was discriminatory), so the Government passed this law to say: “Yeah nah.”

The RIS isn’t just redacted for the public – it was redacted for MPs. *Parliament* voted on this, with all the relevant facts blacked out.

Sure, it’s understandable, right? If you’re passing a law that’s really dodgy, you don’t want advice from civil servants saying “uh, this is pretty illegal” to be public. But actually, that’s not really a problem here, because in the same piece of legislation, THEY SAID THEY CAN’T BE TAKEN TO COURT. More>>