Australia's CSIRO tries to squelch a dissenting view on carbon trading

The same old witch-hunt?
In Japan an academic big figure has recently organized a team of “skeptics busters” consisting of ten or so AGW proponents working in governmental environmental organizations and universities, thogh for the moment their achievements are of quite limited nature,

My take is he is saying that the measures won’t work and that tougher more effective measures should be taken.
Don’t know what the CSIRO is so worried about everyone knows that.
Yes Bulldust the CSIRO has got down in the trough with all the other grant grabbing institutions.Be another 10 years before we get anywhere using hydrogen to power the world

From the original article.
However, he said that under the agency’s charter scientists were forbidden from commenting on matters of government or opposition policy.
The CSIRO charter, introduced last year, was trumpeted by Science Minister Kim Carr as a way to guarantee freedom of expression for scientists.
Orwell politics and the English language used with such aplomb by Minister Kim Carr.

The article states that ““The public appearance is that action is being undertaken,” with the implication being that the government is marching to the tune of the voters. Or by public appearance, does he mean it’s for the benefit of policy maker peers at Copenhagen? In the first case, I’m sure the public don’t give a damn (although I don’t claim to be familiar with climate change opinion down under).
In the second case, taking a trading mechanism to Copenhagen would be like a con-man trying to play trick at a conference for con-men – where everyone is a master of the same trick.
What a mad, mad, mad, mad world we live in.

The choice Clive Spash has provided us with is:
– Emissions Trading (which is ineffective and creates unintended consequences);
– Direct Legislation (which means hard targets and enforcement by an agency composed of pro-AGW believers who now have legislation to back-up what they want to do);
– A Carbon Tax (just keep taxing it more-and-more until it goes away – tax electricity usage, automobile usage – cement – manufacturing etc.)
I will choose none of the above.

Robert E P,
I was in Australia in March this year just after the fires struck Victoria. One of the reasons the fires were so bad was attributed to property owners not being allowed to fell trees and backburn before the fire season arrived.
So when it did arrive…the fires had a ton of additional fuel to consume!
But this is what you get when green morons run councils.
Mailman

“Another friend investigated the CSIRO for its ties to Monsanto” twawki
Just for you information: 85% of Monsanto is held by mutual funds and Institutional (financial) Holders. This has confused people into thinking no one person actually controls Monsanto. This is not true. The fund managers vote the shares. The largest holder of Monsanto stock are divisions of Fidelity. The founding Johnson family controls most of Fidelity. Edward C Johnson 3rd is chairman of the group.
It is not surprising to find the “banksters” behind this very evil corporation.
Monsanto the US government connection and the World Trade Organization
Ann Veneman joined the United States Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service in 1986, serving as Associate Administrator until 1989. During this time she worked on the Uruguay Round talks for the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). later it became the World Trade Organization.
She “played a key role in eliminating trade barriers. She has worked closely with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, helping lead to the successful launch of a new round of trade negotiations for the World Trade Organization.
Ann Veneman served on the board of directors for Calgene Inc. In 1994, Calgene became the first company to bring genetically-engineered food, the Flavr Savr tomato, to supermarket shelves. Calgene was bought out by Monsanto, the nation’s leading biotech company, in 1997. She was Deputy Undersecretary of Agriculture for International Affairs and Commodity Programs from 1989 to 1991 and later Sec of Ag.
“Robert Shapiro was chair of Monsanto while also leading the President’s Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations.
Mickey Kantor, US trade representative (USTR) for much of the Uruguay Round, subsequently became a Monsanto board member
Marcia Hale, a former assistant to President Clinton and director for intergovernmental affairs, was director of international government affairs for Monsanto.
Clayton K. Yeutter, a former secretary of agriculture and US trade representative, who led the US team in negotiating NAFTA and helped launch the GATT Uruguay Round, joined the board of directors at Mycogen Corporation. Mycogen’s majority owner is Dow AgroSciences, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Dow Chemical Company.
The web of interconnections between industry and successive US administrations’ trade negotiators ensures that private (often monopoly) interests will trump those of people and the planet.
It was former Cargill Vice-President, Dan Amstutz was the negotiator appointed to head the delegation, “…who drafted the original text of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture. Opening Southern markets and converting peasant agriculture to corporate agriculture is the primary aim of Cargill and hence the Agreement on Agriculture.
But opening markets for Cargill implies closure of livelihoods for farmers. W.T.O. rules are not just about trade. They determine how food is produced and who controls food production. Converting self-sufficient food economies into food dependent economies is the Cargill vision and the W.T.O. strategy.” http://www.zmag.org/zspace/commentaries/1711
The central bankers and corporations are intent on grabbing all our wealth no matter what country we live in.
This site is VERY long and includes several separate articles about international central banking with links. The Australian article is at http://freedomprime.blogspot.com/2008/08/australias-loss-of-sovereignty-to.html. Go to the middle and look at the articles on banking. Much of the rest is “conspiracy” type stuff but the banking articles are pretty good. If you want other versions specific to the USA
Short: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve http://www.bigeye.com/griffin.htm
A PRIMER ON MONEY: by US House Committee on Banking and Currency (LONG) http://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/Money/patman-primer-on-money.pdf

“We are 10 – 20 years from a really different technological energy environment. If we force it, we end western civilization as we know it (and probably don’t get to these technologies as soon). If we let the market work, we’ll end up much better off than today and continuing to advance as a society / species.” Mike O
Crippling taxes and crippling red tape (regulations) are the best way to kill emerging technologies. Banks and large multinational corporations are anti-competition, anti-free market and anti-capitalism. They want monopolies they control and they use government taxes and red tape to kill any possible competition. The Cap and Trade bill, World Trade Organization, Food Safety con job bills, EPA…. are all about killing competition and screwing the consumer for every cent they can. So people live in poverty and stave – they do not care.
Someone at another site stated “….my brother chose not to see the light of day, and it was his very employer who showed him. He worked for the EPA in oil field site inspections. Consistently he was tasked with fining, and shutting down mom, and pop outfits, but consistently was ordered to leave the big boys like Exxon Mobil alone.
This made a profound impact on the way he looked at the World…. ”
John Munsell documented the USDA’s favoritism that led to a woman’s death and many illnesses. http://www.marlerblog.com/2009/07/articles/lawyer-oped/one-e-coli-o157h7-outbreak-i-think-i-could-have-prevented/ Munsell explains how the new HACCP regs (1996) remove government oversight of our food production. http://www.agpolicy.org/weekcol/467.html
This was backed up by the Apr 17, 2008 Testimony of Mr. Stan Painter, Chairman, National Joint Council of Food Inspection Locals, at a Congressional investigation of the recall of Hallmark/Westland Meat. Stan Painter receive reports from union member that regulations were not uniformly enforced. Painter wrote to the Assistant FSIS Administrator for Field Operation about the enforcement problem. The USDA responsed by placed Painter on disciplinary investigation status and contacted the USDA Office of Inspector General about filing criminal charges.
“It (the recall of Hallmark/Westland Meat) highlights one of the problems that we have attempted to raise with the agency ever since 1996 when the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) inspection system was put in place. There seems to be too much reliance on an honor system for the industry to police itself. While the USDA investigation is still on going at Hallmark/Westland, a couple of facts have emerged that point to a system that can be gamed by those who want to break the law. It (HACCP) shifted the responsibility for food safety over to the companies.” Stan Painter http://domesticpolicy.oversight.house.gov/documents/20080418113258.pdf
December 2004 Freedom of Information Act requests
August 2005 1000 non-compliance reports – weighing some 16 pounds — were turned over
Note they were no criminal charges or removals of management in the USDA and Painter’s testimony was sidelined by the USDA. The food recalls made big headlines that are now being used as an excuse to force pharmacutical manufacturing type red tape on farmers and even home gardeners.
The clause to look for in any bill is this.
HR 875 also includes this.
“in any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction SHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST.”
The Commerce Clause:
“Wickard v. Filburn got to the Supreme Court, and in 1942, the justices unanimously ruled against the farmer. The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce. It also argued that if the price of wheat rose, which is what the government wanted, Mr. Filburn might be tempted to sell his surplus wheat in the interstate market, thwarting the government’s objective.
The Court’s opinion must be quoted to be believed:
[The wheat] supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market. Home-grown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce.
As Epstein commented, “Could anyone say with a straight face that the consumption of home-grown wheat is ‘commerce among the several states?'” For good measure, the Court justified the obvious sacrifice of Mr. Filburn’s freedom and interests to the unnamed farmers being protected:
It is of the essence of regulation that it lays a restraining hand on the self-interest of the regulated and that advantages from the regulation commonly fall to others.
After Wickard , everything is mere detail…. The Court has held that if Congress sees a connection to interstate commerce, it is not its role to second guess.” http://www.fff.org/freedom/0895g.asp
Welcome to 1984. Thanks to the Commerce Clause the government can inspect your frig and bathroom without a warrant if you raise any food – no kidding it happened to a friend of mine.
I expect we will see similar stuff where the EPA comes in and inspects your home under the Cap and Trade bill if they manage to insert into the bill:
“in any action to enforce the requirements of the Cap and Trade law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction SHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST.”

“It would not be surprising to find out you are another one of those tiresome Marxists who hate businesses.
The central bankers and corporations are intent on grabbing all our wealth no matter what country we live in.
I doubt you have ever produced anything of any worth in your entire life. You should be safe.” MartinGAtkins
First I am a Capitalist not a Marxist, it is Corporatism I hate. http://ilovetheconstitution.blogspot.com/2007/07/capitalism-vs-corporatism.html
The author of the Federal Reserve Act was a German banker, Paul Warburg. His brother, Max Warburg, funded the Bolshevik Revolution. You make the mistake most people make in thinking banks and corporations are pro-capitalism, they are not. They want Corporatism and formed the Committee for Economic Development in 1942 to influenced US domestic policies. The CED is composed of chief executive officers and chairmen from the federal reserve, the banking industry, private equity firms, insurance companies, railroads, information technology firms, publishing companies, pharmaceutical companies, the oil and automotive industries,… http://www.opednews.com/articles/History-HACCP-and-the-Foo-by-Nicole-Johnson-090906-229.html
The bankers are/were intent on killing capitalism because the last thing they wanted was competition!
“Competition is a sin said John D. Rockefeller I and that includes competition from these upstart banks…
One of the purposes of the Federal Reserve System was to keep the lid on those new competitive banks so they could never grow and become large like the ones on Wall Street. The small banks have always been the target in this system and needed to be kept in line, to be regulated out of existence, a process which you’ve noticed has been going on for many, many years. There is objective number one..
Objective number two was to reverse the trend of what is called private capital formation. That’s banker language for a process in which an individual or a corporation uses their own savings to pay for something instead of going to the bank and borrowing it, if you can imagine that happening. It was happening at the turn of the century. The trend was that businesses in particular were withholding some of their dividends each quarter and putting that money into a sinking fund and then as the money accumulated or as the capital formed, then they finally had enough that they could use their own money to build that new factory or to launch a research & development project or whatever instead of going to the banks and borrowing for it. The banks were very concerned over this trend because this is their life-blood.” http://www.bigeye.com/griffin.htm
Compare what happen In the 1920’s to today.
“During this depression, the trust operators achieved further control by their backing of three international swindlers, The Van Sweringen brothers, Samuel Insull, and Ivar Kreuger. These men pyramided billions of dollars worth of securities to fantastic heights. The bankers who promoted them and floated their stock issue could have stopped them at any time, by calling loans of less than a million dollars, but they let these men go on until they had incorporated many industrial and financial properties into holding companies, which the banks then took over for nothing….
The revelation of the Federal Reserve Board’s final decision to trigger the Crash of 1929 appears, amazingly enough, in The New York Times. On April 20, 1929… The Federal Reserve Board had already warned the stockholders of the Federal Reserve Banks to get out of the Market, on February 6, 1929, but it had not bothered to say anything to the rest of the people. Nobody knew what was going on except the Wall Street bankers who were running the show…. Both J.P. Morgan and Kuhn, Loeb Co. had “preferred lists” of men… The men on these lists were notified of the coming crash, and sold all but so-called gilt-edged stocks..
Predictably enough, all of the big bankers rode through the depression “with flying colors.” The people who suffered were the workers and farmers who had invested their money
The Crash of 1929 also saw the formation of giant holding companies which picked up these cheap bonds and securities,. In 1929 J.P. Morgan Company organized the giant food trust, Standard Brands. There was an unequaled opportunity for trust operators to enlarge and consolidate their holdings
Now look at what happened in the 1980’s
“Both economic and regulatory factors combined to spur the explosion in large takeovers and, in turn, large LBOs. The three regulatory factors were the Reagan administration’s relatively laissez-faire policies on antitrust and securities laws, which allowed mergers the government would have challenged in earlier years; the 1982 Supreme Court decision striking down state antitakeover laws (which were resurrected with great effectiveness in the late eighties); and deregulation of many industries, which prompted restructurings and mergers….
LBOs and other leveraged recapitalizations force managements to sell unprofitable divisions, avoid low pay-off investments, eliminate wasteful corporate expenses and diversifying acquisitions, and boost operating efficiency in order to meet the interest charges on the high level of debt. These forced efficiencies eliminate the value gap and create net economic gains for shareholders. Although this is a severe solution that exposes the firm to financial distress in the few years after the LBO, the evidence is that the LBOs and leveraged restructurings of the eighties created large net gains for shareholders.” http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc1/TakeoversandLeveragedBuyouts.html
The leveraged buyouts took well managed well funded companies like Gillette, which had no outstanding debt and destroyed them that is why the USA has LESS productive employees in 2009 than they did in 1970. I know a guy whose company packed up and shipped manufacturing plants overseas.
“I doubt you have ever produced anything of any worth in your entire life.”
Actually I have worked in production factories making textiles, personnel care products, drugs, plastics and ceramics for 25 years and now I farm, producing meat and wool.
What I want to see is the red tape and regulations strangling true capitalism removed. I want the usury where interest on any loan of fiat money (meaning money made out of nothing) is illegal. When a US bank loans out $100,000 they have a MAX of $3,000 dollars in cash reserve the rest is fairy dust that does not exist except as a new entry in a computer.
“Thomas Edison said, “People who will not turn a shovel-full of dirt on the project nor contribute a pound of materials will collect more money than will the people who will supply all the materials and do all the work.” I wondered when I read that if Tom was exaggerating so I got my calculator out. I assumed that there was going to be a $100,000 house built. I assumed that $30,000 would have to go for land, architect’s fees and permits and that kind of thing. $70,000 would go for the actual construction of the house, building materials and labor. I assumed that the buyer would go to the bank and put 20% down and then borrow the balance at 10% over 30 years. I punched in the numbers and discovered that the borrower will pay to the bank in interest $172,741 compared to $70,000 paid for the construction of the house. In other words, about 2 1/2 times as much money will be paid to the bank in interest than will be paid to those who provide all the labor and all the materials. And you may say to yourself, yes but that’s fair, after all a 30 year loan is a long loan and people work for their money and sacrifice its use and loan it and so forth and deserve to be compensated. No. Not this money. Nobody worked for this money, nobody saved this money. There was no sacrifice of any kind for this money. This money was created out of nothing and I suggest that $172,741 interest on nothing is excessive!” http://www.bigeye.com/griffin.htm

I used to work for CSIRO indirectly, and trust me, their “cutting edge” research into mining technology is by no means the leading authority, when compared to private industry and industry-sponsored researchers.
CSIRO is motivated now, more so than ever, by the hand that feeds them, and are compelled to keep the government happy.

How could you talk about CSIRO and not post this!

Gail Combs (12:44:29) :
First I am a Capitalist not a Marxist, it is Corporatism I hate.
I’m a vegetarian it’s just I like eating meat. Corporatism is capitalism. Cooperative pooling of spare capital is the essence of capitalism. You may not be a Marxist and in this I grant I may have been rash in my assesment but you are a very confused person.
You make the mistake most people make in thinking banks and corporations are pro-capitalism, they are not.
You do not know what capitalism is and this is why you make these ridicules disjointed statements.
From your link:-

On the contrary, these measures will permit large processors to become an essentially unregulated segment of the industry by privatizing the inspection process, and — at the same time — the new regulations will constitute a cost-prohibitive barrier for small players to remain in business, making them easy targets for indiscriminant enforcement and greater market consolidation.

This is a truly warped assessment. The aim of most legislation in this regard is to acknowledge that the government does not have the resources to oversee the safety aspects of all goods produced for public consumption. As such it is for producers to formulate a best practice frame work for each industry and present their findings to the regulatory authorities so that they can then ensure that all players abide by the guidelines.
It does not “constitute a cost-prohibitive barrier for small players to remain in business” unless you want you baker to mix his dough in a washed out cement mixer.
The rest of your post is just a confused mass of diatribe and has nothing to do with science. You have a scatter gun approach to the various complexities of society and you will achieve nothing with long lists of things you think are unjust but have no understanding of the intricate nature of life much less any formative remedies.

“Regulations are a weapon used by multinational cartels to create a no competition monopoly.” Gail
Gail,
You blow me away. I am very glad and proud to be on the same side as you. We “get” it. The other side doesn’t.
Keep at it though I doubt anyone could stop you!

“You do not know what capitalism is and this is why you make these ridicules disjointed statements. “ MartinGAtkins
I suspect you do not know the difference between “money” and “capital.” If you understood fractional reserve banking in a government enforced monopoly money you would realize that banks and borrowers LOOT capital via money creation.

suspect you do not know the difference between “money” and “capital.” If you understood fractional reserve banking in a government enforced monopoly money you would realize that banks and borrowers LOOT capital via money creation.
I’m not going to get involved in an economic debate in a science blog. I know the difference between money and capital. It’s not the banks and borrowers who loot your capital via money creation. It’s your government.

“Europe is embracing a specific form of socialism. By regulating and dictating what products can be produced and who produces them they aim to control all commerce. This is not capitalism it’s National Socialism.”
In that we are agreed. In the USA the large corporations buy the politicians. A check of the USDA and the FDA shows a revolving door between Cargill, Monsanto and the rest.
For Example Mike Taylor was counsel to FDA, then worked for King & Spalding (representing Monsanto) and that is where we got the ruling that GMO is the same as regular crops and needs no testing.
History, HACCP and the Food Safety Con Job http://farmwars.info/?p=1565 traces the influence of the Council on Foreign Relations influence of farm legislation since 1942. The Council on Foreign Relations is “Composed of chief executive officers and chairmen from the federal reserve, the banking industry, private equity firms, insurance companies, railroads, information technology firms, publishing companies, pharmaceutical companies, the oil and automotive industries, meat packing companies, retailers and assisted by university economists…” and was formed to influence domestic US policies.
That and the Federal Reserve is what I mean by corporate/bank/government collusion.
A PRIMER ON MONEY: by the Congressional COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/Money/patman-primer-on-money.pdf
is where I got much of my information on the federal reserve and the bankers influence on government.
In 1933, Congressman McFadden introduced House Resolution No. 158, Articles of Impeachment for the Secretary of the Treasury, two assistant Secretaries of the Treasury, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, and the officers and directors of its twelve regional banks. Subsequently he was shot at twice, poisoned and had his stomach pumped, and poison a second time so he reportedly “died of the stomach flue” on Oct. 3, 1936.
Here is part of McFadden’s speech http://www.apfn.net/Doc-100_bankruptcy29.htm
“Mr. Chairman, the United States is bankrupt: It has been bankrupted by the corrupt and dishonest Fed. It has repudiated its debts to its own citizens. Its chief foreign creditor is Great Britain, and a British bailiff has been at the White House and the British Agents are in the United States Treasurymaking inventory arranging terms of liquidations!…”Mr. Chairman, the Fed has offered to collect the British claims in full from the American public by trickery and corruption, if Great Britain will help to conceal its crimes. The British are shielding their agents, the Fed,…
It is amazing how many presidents and other political leaders end up dead, killed by “a lone gunman” after defying the banking powers, Ain’t those numbered swiss bank accounts handy? Nine American Presidents have been the targets of assassination http://theruthlesstruth.com/wordpress/?p=742 The latest was Ron Paul, just a few short weeks after he had assure his supporters he was in the Presidential race to the end, he abruptly quit a couple of days after the Bildeburgers met he in the USA.
Money buys votes and politicians whether it is Global Warming, Food Safety or bank bailouts. If you follow the thread you keep coming back to the same people.

Correction Council on Foreign Relations should have been Committee for Economic Development CED.