Monthly Archives: April 2011

UN’s 50 million climate refugees by 2010

The Australian newspaper has given the right prominence on their front page to yet another utterly nonsensical Climate Change alarmist claim by the UN.

There are of course no 50 million climate refugees, by any definition, as one of the earlier sources for the story, Gavin Atkins at the Asian Correspondent demonstrates here.

But as with ‘Himalayan glaciers melting by 2035′ debacle, the wrong predictions are only part of the story. The shame is in the rent-seeking use to which these alarmist lies are put and the dishonest responses from the UN/IPCC upon being discovered.

Firstly, the UN uses apocalyptic stories like this 50 million climate refugees to try to extort money from the world, as they tried at Copenhagen. Asian Correspondent explains it’s all about wealth redistribution for the UN. Undeterred by absence of climate refugees, UN asks for money for 50 million people anyway:

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, on behalf of international humanitarian organizations, todaycalled for USD 7.4 billion to provide urgent humanitarian aid to 50 million people in 28 countries worldwide here.

Secondly, upon discovery they disappear the map and the story from their web page here:

After Asian Correspondent reviewed its findings earlier this week, the story has been linked to by websites around the world such as Investor NewsAmerican Spectator and was referred to in yesterday’s Australiannewspaper and even got a mention on Fox News.

However, the website which is maintained by GRID-Arendal, an official United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) collaborating centre, has now deleted the map.

What’s more, the error message dishonestly claims:

Dear visitor, it seems like the map you are navigating by is maybe not fully up-to-date, or that it might have an error in it, or is it that your GPS is not loaded with the correct data?.

Despite deleting the map, the webpage and the Google cache, the sleuths at Anthony Watts’ WUWT found the original maphere.

Thirdly, when they can’t disappear the facts, they try to distance themselves from the predictions by claiming they never said ithere:

But now the UN is distancing itself from the forecast: “It is not a UNEP prediction,” a UNEP spokesman told SPIEGEL ONLINE. The forecast has since been removed from UNEP’s website….

Whatever their argument, the United Nations has their fingerprints all over the 50 million refugees claim. See, for example, if any of you super-sleuths can find any UN links to the claim here.

It was also repeated, as der Spiegel pointed out, by the President of the UN General Assembly, Srgjan Kerim and the former head of the UNFCCC, Yvo (“don’t call me Smoky”) de Boer.

And – for heaven’s sake – it was repeated in one of the UNEP’s own media releases.

Actually, this prediction has been spruiked by ‘senior UN researchers’ as late as last year here.

For a complete and entertaining list of everything that is claimed to be caused by global warming see the warmlist here.

But, why you ask, would the UN exaggerate the Climate Change crisis? Money…its always about the money, and power:

The UN created the IPCC, which exaggerated a mild mostly natural climate warming into a global Climate Change existential crisis. This, the IPCC and UN argue, needs strict control over carbon energy production in western industries and vast sums of money as reparations to 3rd world countries, which the UN is happy to administer. The UN thus becomes the pre-eminent body to supervise every country’s energy production and extract  billions of dollars from western countries for ‘climate damages’. Some say this will make the UN a world administrative body over energy with de facto taxation powers on nations – perhaps a sort of a world governance – all spelt out for us in the Copenhagen Treaty.  Many would welcome such administration unencumbered by elections and accountability, if it is needed to save the world. So we come full circle back to the 50 Million climate refugees needed to be saved by the UN.



Date:         Saturday, 7 May
Time:        11:30am to 1:30pm
Venue:     Queensland Parliament House, corner of George & Alice Streets, Brisbane Qld Australia





Date:         Sunday 15th May
Time:        1pm
Venue:     William Street, Port Macquarie NSW

Book your bus tickets early to ensure you have a seat on the ‘convoy’
to Rob Oakeshott’s Electorate town of Port Macquarie.

Coaches will depart Central, Parramatta, Penrith, Campbelltown,
Sutherland, Hornsby, Northern Beaches, Gosford and Newcastle.

Book your seats by email See our newsletters page
on how to book. Tickets $50 return.

Everyone welcome to join the rally and ask Rob Oakeshott why he has
turned his back on his majority conservative electorate?


Date:          Saturday, 21 May
Time:        12:30pm to 2:30pm
Venue:      Western Sydney, TBA


The Rally date has been confirmed as Sunday 26 June 1pm to 2:30pm
Venue is still being negotiated with council.  To be confirmed.

Date:             Sunday, 26 June
Time:           1pm to 2:30pm
Location:   Central Coast – venue TBA
Volunteers please contact

Anti-Carbon Tax Rally – Sat 9 April

Approximately 3000 people attended the CATA organised Blacktown Rally to send a message to Canberra that a price on carbon will hurt Australia’s small businesses. Speakers included Senator Bronwyn Bishop, Senator Barnaby Joyce (via telephone link after he damaged his leg in an accident), Craig Kelly, MP for Hughes, respected climatologist David Archibald and crowd favourite, 2GB personality Brian Wilshire. The speakers’ focus was on small business, which is already finding it difficult in these tough economic times, and a carbon tax will result in businesses closing down or relocating overseas with jobs lost in Australia.

The next CATA rally will be in Port Macquarie (Rob Oakeshott’s electorate) on 15 May 2011 (Sunday) – details to be announced.


SBS Insight – Prof Garnaut shredded on Carbon Tax

Insight on SBS starts asking the hard questions on the Carbon Tax.  The debate is eye-watering. Garnaut fails on every level – defensive, evasive and sounding most unconvincing. Surely the beginning of the end for this pseudo-expert.

Transcript here.

There are so many good arguments in this program against this climate madness that you must see it for yourself. But focusing on the underlying science – the ultimate reason for this tax, I noticed one glaring omission by Ross Garnaut:

When challenged about his doomsday science preditions, Garnaut responds:

In the end, [if you are] someone who really looks at the evidence, who respects the academies of science of Australia, of the United States, of the United Kingdom, Japan, Russia, China, India, all of the countries of scientific achievement, if you respect the academies of science, the real scientists there, then you will recognise that this is a big problem.

What happened to the IPCC, incessantly referred to by Penny Wong and others? All of these academies relied on the reports from the United Nations’ IPCC – the now so discredited an organisation for being biased and politicised, that it and the UN are “he who must not be named”.

Prof Garnaut, in my view, has had his credibility shredded in this performance.