The Climate Skeptics Party launch 4 television ads in Australia

This is likely to cause a bit of a stir. Michael  from the Climate Skeptics Party in Australia writes in Tips and Notes:

The TCS ad campaign hit the airwaves last night in Australia. I thought you might be interested and post them on your website.

Here are the other TV advertisements:

Kind Regards

Michael

The Climate Sceptics

Policy and Media Unit

Townsville Qld

email: climatesceptics.policy.media@gmail.com

website: http://www.climatesceptics.com.au

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

100 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Patrick Davis
November 19, 2009 6:42 am

Ah, depends on the time and channel. I didn’t see them at all. We usually get the pro-AGW sheet.
But at least we don’t get the “black CO2” deemon in the sky ads anymore. Sadly however, KRudd747 is set on being the “poster boy” for climate tax in Crapenhagen.

M White
November 19, 2009 6:47 am

Skeptics from Weather Action
http://www.kane-tv.com/wa/index.html

IanM
November 19, 2009 6:49 am

Headline: “launch” is misspelled.
Best regards.
IanM

MIke O
November 19, 2009 6:52 am

I watched one of the other videos (you can get to 9 different videos using the pane at the bottom of each player) which went into detail on Miskolczi’s Law. The video was narrated by one of the IPCC reviewers who shared the Nobel prize and seems to refute the IPCC work.
Is anyone familiar with this Law and what has transpired with it since it was first proposed in 2007?
Thanks.

Editor
November 19, 2009 6:53 am

Maybe they “launchL the ads?

Telboy
November 19, 2009 6:56 am

Good to see the truth in a climate story advert. We could do with some like it to counteract the pernicious “Act on co2” rubbish we get in the UK

Bruce Cobb
November 19, 2009 6:57 am

Good to see.
Hopefully, they will at least cause people to question what has been continually trumpeted as the unassailable “truth” by the lamestream media, and do some research of their own.

Poptech
November 19, 2009 7:05 am

This is the sort of af campaign we need in the U.S. Brilliant!

DaveF
November 19, 2009 7:07 am

I think that you mean “launch” rather than “lauch” in the title.
[Thanx, fixed. ~dbs, mod.]

Matt in Wyoming
November 19, 2009 7:10 am

Short and simple. I wonder if we’ll get something like that going here in the states?

Anders L.
November 19, 2009 7:14 am

Starting with 1998, eh? … well as long as you are not cherry-picking …

rbateman
November 19, 2009 7:15 am

Nice.
Everybody loves to see the Ken Lays, Bernard Madeoffs, Michael Milkins and Ivan Boeskys get their con games strung out like dirty laundry.
Why?
It makes the honest people feel good about being upright, instead of feeling like a used rag.

DaveE
November 19, 2009 7:18 am

Wonder how much a 30sec ad costs here in the UK.
DaveE.

rbateman
November 19, 2009 7:20 am

Poptech (07:05:48) :
Yes, send them to FOX News care of Glenn Beck.
Then send them to the GOP, care of Michael Steele.
America loves to see con men exposed. It’s the new National Passtime.
We’re a bit tired of Senators cheating on their wives while campaigning on morality platforms, and failing to pay thier taxes while raising ours.

Barry Foster
November 19, 2009 7:33 am

Anders, where would you choose to start it from?

Erik
November 19, 2009 7:35 am

Would never be allowed in the US. The TV channel’s ownership have far too much invested in “Green” tech that it would countermand what they want. NBC’s “Green Week” on each of their channel properties is a great example of where ads like this would not be allowed. NBC is owned by GE, which bought up several green technology sections off of Enron. It’s in their own best interest to push the AGW idea as it helps them to sell more.

Jason
November 19, 2009 7:37 am

Could have done without a nuclear stack being used as an example of a CO2 outputer. On the whole I would say the 3rd commercial is the most effective.

Dave
November 19, 2009 7:42 am

Any chance one of these can run on CNN or MSNBC?

Barry Foster
November 19, 2009 7:49 am

More rubbish from the BBC, courtesy of model Helena Christensen. She has a photo exhibition in London to show climate change in Peru.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts_and_culture/8367039.stm
She bangs on about it, but the only thing is, it doesn’t appear to stand up. Looking at the GISS station data there appears to be a problem.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=309846860003&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Ms Christensen says her village is Pacchanta, and I’m pretty sure this GISS station is the closest. Anyone know any different before I contact the exhibitors and point out they’ve made a mistake?

Ron de Haan
November 19, 2009 7:49 am

I applaude the initiative, any initiative to fight back on AGW propaganda hype.
I wonder however if the layman understands the message of each individual commercial.
Number 1 is ok but I think it would have been better to make the link between temperature, Co2 made responsible for non existing Global Warming and the useless but costly ETS scheme so people make the connection.
I like the red threat through all four commercials ending with “You’re conned” very much because that’s exactly where it’s all about.
At the end of the message they should have listed an easy to remember web address for further information. http://www.conned.com would have done a fine job.

November 19, 2009 7:51 am

I love the “You Have Been Conned” tag line. Maybe it’s something that could be picked up by other political parties worldwide – to help ram home the message?
As I said earlier, I wish the Tories would take that line here in the UK – they’d get enormous support for it.
Instead we get ads of a fictitious fairy story saying we’re to blame. I complained to the ASA, as did many others. As a Government body, I wonder what the outcome of their enquiry will be?!

royfomr
November 19, 2009 8:00 am

Anders L. (07:14:22) :
Starting with 1998, eh? … well as long as you are not cherry-picking …
Doesn’t seem too unreasonable to pick as a start date, the end date used by the warmist industry to ‘prove’ we’re all doomed!

chillybean
November 19, 2009 8:09 am

Now this article has really made my day.

Knut Witberg
November 19, 2009 8:10 am

If there where a credible body that would collect money and pay for ads, I would contribute

Paul
November 19, 2009 8:12 am

While I agree with you that starting with 1998 is a little bit of cherry picking data. The premise of AGW is that we are getting warmer and looking over the past decade, that is clearly not happening. Also, it actually starts with 1997 so that the spike in 1998 can be seen clearly. This is probably the first time a lay person has actually seen this graph. I know I still thought that the hockey stick was viable up until a few months ago. That was the only information that was available!

1 2 3 4
Verified by MonsterInsights