Mark Thompson submits this story:
Now that we have a majority Conserviative government in Canada and the past history of Liberal obfuscation is being erased, the Canadian and the broader world public is now getting a chance to hear the truth on climate issues.
The video link provided is two hours of testimony before a Canadian Senate Committee from December 15, 2011. Most who have a skeptical viewpoint will have already heard of some or all of the four presenters.
The presentations and follow-up questions are both excellent! Interesting to note the avoidance of some of the alarmist bullying seen in some of the U.S. Senate hearings from the likes of Clinton and Boxer. Of course, you’ll see the odd Liberal senator make the typical noxious commentary around thousands of scientists and ‘consensus’ but it doesn’t matter, they are only looking increasingly foolish.
View it all here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMQk-q8SpBU&feature=related
Mitchell, the Liberal senator just before the end, I think, did his AGW cause no favours, with his long rushed rant (instead of a question) stringing together as many alarmist slogans and attacks as possible, trying to tell other senators what the outcome of their hearing would conclude. He may have just been the catalyst needed for undecided senators to look more closely at the skeptics position.
I thought McKitrick was best, with clear, to the point explanations and his economics background more important to the sentor’s policy decision needs. Next came Tim Patterson who I think was the best of the 3 scientists. He rang a bell with his Ice Road relation to the Senators policy making decisions. Ian Clark dazzled the senaotrs with too much science. His good graphs left them puzzled. So it was a shame that he didn’t explain at a level the senators could understand more easily. Jan Veizer, came through as a typical ivory tower academic, which was a shame too, with all his excellent research. His emotion at the end somewhat reduced the skeptics impact on the senators, playing a bit to Mitchell’s position.
All through, I could feel for the other senators, trying to understand, for their voters, the real problems with new policy decisions they must now make, given the obvious public debate on climate science now. They thought the science was settled and now they must come to terms that they have made wrong policy decisions.
We skeptics would do well to realize how much the average person doesn’t know about science, let alone climate science. As one senator noted, after a long days work the tired average citizen expects the scientists to keep their own house clean (just like the police and hospitals) and give people accurate information. Lets hope more panels like this spread to other senates in the West.
Well worth the two hours watching the Canadian Senate get the skeptical side for the first time. Thanks JTF for this post and that was a good video and shows just where our efforts need to be placed. Most Senators seemed to never had heard of our side at all. Amazing.
Everyone, watch if you can.
I love the testimonies of Professor Jan Veizer and Professor Tim Patterson.
No dissolve the UN IPCC, EPA and sack Obama before the choke you to death
Geoff Smith says:
January 2, 2012 at 5:17 am
WHO CARES IT IS NOT…… NOT BEING BROADCAST IN CANADIAN NEWS!!!!!!!
Yes I am yelling. I am sick and tired of people on these blogs getting all excited about nothing.
The idiot on the street still believes in GW and the news here is shockingly so biased towards it that no other side is broadcast. My god have none of you talked to your family and friends and neighbours over the holidays. Like talking to a wall.
A Quebec company lost a contract because the British company it dealt with was upset with our politicians pulling out of the Kyoto accord. The news presented was all about how we were getting screwed by our politicians because they are skeptics.
Until every moron on the street who votes understands the truth we will be forced to spend money on useless gov’t programs and worse.
Lets hope 2012 is the year some very strong action is taken against the AGW movement.
Actually this is very important. It is getting out. We have a “FoxNorth” called Sun News Network and the programs they have on this issue are all pro-skeptic and out right contempt for the IPCC (and UN in general). When the topic comes up in papers like the Globe&Mail and Toronto Star the VAST majority of people post comments do not support AGW, and are well informed, including WUWT readers. The word is getting out to the general public. If we are not at a tipping point yet, we will be soon. I can tell you that on Twitter and other forums that people were posting how proud they were to be Canadian when the news came out we were not continuing with Kyoto (They were all just as proud when Canada annouced we would not participate in the UN Security Council as long as North Korea was Chair).
Harper is adding 7 more conservatives to the Senate this year, This is only going to get better.
Brady CaldwellBrady says:
January 2, 2012 at 6:30 am
Mitchell, the Liberal senator just before the end, I think, did his AGW cause no favours, with his long rushed rant (instead of a question) stringing together as many alarmist slogans and attacks as possible, trying to tell other senators what the outcome of their hearing would conclude. He may have just been the catalyst needed for undecided senators to look more closely at the skeptics position.
It is because of arrogant Liberals like him that the Liberal Party of Canada is at an all time low in seats in the House of Commons. They were devistated last year in elections. The NDP, more socialist than the Liberals, is opposition in Canada. Not to worry about them ever getting power, they generally run less than 15% support because they are too radical. Liberalism and socialism in Canada is in the toilet, we can only hope this is perminent.
Geoff tell us how u really feel. I tend to agree with u. The silly research preprint pre research media packages of impending doom will not stop till the gravy train ends and is exchanged for some other gravy train. They are drug addicts and will not go away.
Professor Jan Veizer: “Stating that CO2 drives climate is like stating that the economy of Pueorto Rico drives the World Economy”.
Professor Tim Patterson: “Our scientific knowledge of the climate system is accumulating very fast. With the knowledge we have today there wouldn’t be a Kyoto Protocol”.
Heartland’s post: Climate Realists Testify Before Canadian Senate, Cite New Heartland Book provides links to each speakers home.
Dr. Ross McKitrick, Professor, Department of Economics,University of Guelph.
Dr. Ian D. Clark, Professor, Department of Earth Sciences,University of Ottawa.
Dr. Jan Veizer, Distinguished University Professor, Emeritus, Department of Earth Sciences,University of Ottawa.
Dr. Timothy Patterson, Professor of Geology, Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University.
Dr. Clark held up a copy of Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report
Here are the Clark and Veizer presentations showing their slides. Patterson and McKitrick didn’t use slides.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5zakcprRIs&feature=related
I liked Jan Veizer’s analogy. That under the IPCC model of positive feedback, Puerto Rico drives the world economy. That an increase in economic activity in Puerto Rico increases economic activity in the US, which increase economic activity worldwide. That a decrease in economic activity in Puerto Rico decreases economic activity in the US which decreases economic activity in the US which reduces economic activity worldwide. Thus Puerto Rico drives the world economy.
His point was that the sun drives the water cycle, which drives the carbon cycle. Not the other way round.
Excellent series of videos. One can only hope that some of the politicians in the UK might also see them.
Sarc / Of course the Bernie Madoff scandal didn’t happen, did it. And the sub prime casino-banking collapse didn’t happen either, did it. And so it goes without saying that NASA and the IPCC can’t be wrong either. / Sarc.
You would think by now that our politicians (UK) might have become just a little less gullible and just a little more inclined to scepticism and to ask questions. But no, it seems they are as easily duped by our Newspapers front pages as ever.
Much as I hate cold weather I find myself wishing that the sun quickly gets to it’s max in the current low solar cycle asap and start it’s expected long (and therefore) decline and the North Atlantic move into it’s 30 year negative phase asap and so join the Pacific in it’s 30 year cold phase. I read that the last time all three were together in a cold phase was during the Maunder minimum when the Thames froze over in some style and millions died throughout Europe.
Add in the tiny little bit (2%) of extra obliquity since the Maunder minimum and it might get cold enough here in the UK to even rouse a few of our Members of Parliament out of their hypnotised ostrich head-in-the-sand stupor. OK, it’s the New Year and I might be being a tad optimistic.
Just as long as wine doesn’t run out all will be OK.
Prof. Jan Veizer, Distinguished University Professor (Emeritus)
PhD (1968), Slovak Academy of Sciences, PhD (1971), Australian National University
“1000 molecules of water for every molecule of CO2”.
Pointed to clouds: 30 watts/m^2 difference between clouds and cloudless.
A few % variation can easily account for the disputed 1.6 W/m^2.
Dr. Timothy Patterson, Professor of Geology, Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University
Notes: “One of the lowest solar cycles is coming up – Government needs to prepare for cooling – global cooling primary threat, especially for Canada. Ice roads – 88% over lakes. More than $500 million carried to camps. $ 1 billion generated.
Pacific Decadal Oscillation – discovered in 1996 – contributes to step wise temperature changes. Correlation between solar cycles – troughs and temperatures.
We are heading into very week solar cycles for several decades. The PDO just shifted to negative. Thus we will have several decades that will enable use of the ice roads. If had known what we do know today – we would not have need the Kyoto protocol.”
INTERVIEW: DR. R. TIMOTHY PATTERSON There’s No Correlation Between CO2 and Climate Change
Cores give the highest resolution – can see annual resolution. Enormous variability. Only looking back 3000 years (since much warmer before.) At northern end of agriculture in Northern Territories. Cooling will have serious consequences. Need adaptation strategies. If cool, can’t make things grow in short seasons. Project next few decades will have good conditions for ice roads!
Ref to Milankovitch cycles
Anthony, Thank-you so much for this link! The Canadian news media has a complete black-out on these hearings. I would never have heard that it took place. Sincerely, thanks so much!
I have listened to the presentations and I have heard most of the information prior in this blog, however, seeing these guys in suits, with the formality of a senate hearing, speaking succinctly, and so devastatingly to the “fools paradise”….and the “obfuscation” by the “group think” was exalting….it really was exalting….I was transfixed. I could not believe that our view was being heard. McKitrick and Clark were devastating to the UN and CRU.
It was heartwarming to see my countrymen present their ideas in such a calm and clear and rational way in face of the global AGW hysteria at the UN.
Thanks Anthony. You have been such a tremendous support to this effort, you and all your contributors. Nice job.
Dinoflagellate cyst-based reconstructions of mid to late Holocene winter sea-surface temperature and productivity from an anoxic fjord in the NE Pacific Ocean R. Timothy Patterson, Graeme T. Swindles, Helen M. Roe, Arun Kumar, Andreas Prokoph Quaternary International 235 (2011) 13-25
This gives very high resolution measurement of temperature fluctuations:
I’ve emailed my MP the link to this – and I am going to book a meeting with him to bring/show other literature – thank you for posting this link.
We need sharp tools of this kind to get through to our politicians – keep them coming.
Seems like an appropriate time to share, once again, the blame…
Blame Canada!
Carlton University posts the virtual Hooper Museum, including:
Our Everchanging Climate
including Rapid Climate Change
Brady CaldwellBrady says:
January 2, 2012 at 6:30 am
Jan Veizer, came through as a typical ivory tower academic, which was a shame too, with all his excellent research. His emotion at the end somewhat reduced the skeptics impact on the senators, playing a bit to Mitchell’s position.
—————-
Is that a man’s point of view? Senator Mitchell had just pretty much accused the 4 scientists of being conspiracy theorists and kooks. I thought Veizer’s emotion was understandable, and he actually showed quite a bit of self-control considering the snide, smug and smarmy nastiness of Mitchell’s comments. Overall, I thought the presentation prior to this was cool, factual and insightful, and am very grateful that McKitrick, Clark, Veizer and Patterson agreed to testify before this committee, allowing the more open-minded politicians a glimpse of the truth through the fog of climate warfare. Well done!
It is a very interesting discussion and good to see the green shoots of a balanced debate
Ross McKitrick floated an interesting “bet” in the form of a tax which could vary according to temperature trends. This doesn’t work as proposed because it assumes the removal of money from the private sector will automatically save CO2.
Tax revenue goes into the hands of the government – if it is spent (or displaces other spending) it is almost certainly not neutral. To complete the proposal, Ross would need to add some meaningful measure of how passing money into the public sector would deliver a net CO2 reduction.
Good to see the Canadians looking more calmly at AGW than the rest of the world — go boys and girls go!
On another note I ‘ve visited the D day beaches and war cemetories in Northern France where so many Canadian Lads lost thier lives and have been laid to rest— truly heartbreaking
God bless Canada from Adrian in Britain
David Hagen,
Thanks for that paper – I had not seen it, very valuable.
Is it me, or is there an alarming absence of “R. Gates” and “Lazy Teenager”, from the comment section, when they know they are outclassed?
(Not that it is difficult to ‘outclass’ those two … … … )
David Hagen,
Thanks for the notes. I didn’t do a good job taking notes and references while listening.
I just watched the video and put it on my Facebook page. I wonder if any of my pro AGW nieces and nephews will comment. My sister called me on Christmas day from the UK. Her first question was what did I think of Canada pulling out of Kyoto. I said Canada had to get out before 2012 or pay 14 Billion in penalties. She was shocked. She had not heard of penalties. I think most of the people posting on Environment Canada’s website have never heard of the penalty either. I have tried to educate them but doubt if they will ever go back to the site to see my comment. Why does Environment Canada have a website that is pro AGW? They also disallow comments that they do not want posted. I do not want my tax dollars going to that and have told my MP. The conservative government should rid the payroll of all Liberals and greenies.
Nice presentations. If the Canadians do their Committee transcripts the way the Aussies and Brits do, hopefully the slides will be available in due course.
Oh, and McKitrick is hawt! Very charismatic – hadn’t seen him in the flesh before. Agree with PP that he should be used as a frontman more often. He certainly blows away the ugly trolls that seem to proliferate on the CAGW side. Maybe taking up CAGW as a career is a substitute for getting girls.