Relevant

June 26, 2009: "The Climate Change Climate Change - The number of skeptics is swelling everywhere", Wall Street Journal, New York City, U.S.A.

"now might be the time for U.S. politicians to re-engage on the science. One thing for sure: They won't be alone."

Read the whole piece.

June 19th 2009: ICSC adviser Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University interviewed by Kelly Fuller on ABC Radio New England, Australia. 

Listen here.

June 18, 2009: "Waiting for the Other Shoe to drop on the Climate File - Canadians about to pay the price for Conservative's failure of nerve to alter the language of the climate debate", by Tom Harris, Executive Director, ICSC, Canada Free Press, Toronto, Canada.

"Rather than attempting to give comments on the arcane logistics of a program that will undoubtedly cause significant economic harm, Canadians should demand that Prentice delay the ’greenhouse gas’ offset program until the government has first asked for public comment on draft documents that supply answers to the sort of questions average citizens naturally ask when such a vast and expensive undertaking is planned:

• What will this cost me, either directly through increased consumer prices or indirectly through greater taxes or reduced government services or in increased national debt?
• Will I, as a consumer, ultimately be the one who pays for the credits about to be awarded?
• What are the benefits of your program?
• etc."

Read whole piece.  View public comments to date on this piece.

June 17, 2009: "MIT's unscientific, catastrophic climate forecast", by ICSC Advisors, Dr. Kesten C. Green of the Business and Economic Forecasting Unit at Monash University in Australia and Professor J. Scott Armstrong, of The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Financial Post, National Post, Toronto, Canada.

"Policymakers and the public should be made aware that the forecasts from the MIT modellers, as well as those used by the IPCC, are merely the opinions of some scientists and computer modellers. It is not proper to claim that these are truly scientific forecasts."

Read the whole piece.  Visit Armstrong and Green's forecasting site at http://www.publicpolicyforecasting.com/.

June 12, 2009: "Offset System for Greenhouse Gases shows Government Unconcerned with Reality, by Tom Harris, Executive Director, ICSC, Canada Free Press, Toronto.

"One of the most significant climate science documents ever produced was released in Washington, DC last week. Coming to conclusions diametrically opposed to those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the new Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) is essential reading for all politicians, or at least those who want to develop policies that actually benefit their countries and the environment.

This week’s carbon dioxide cap and trade announcement by Canadian Environment Minister Jim Prentice clearly demonstrates that he does not fall into that category. By totally ignoring the NIPCC and, instead, announcing policies that are, according to economist Professor Ross McKitrick of Guelph University, “like a carbon tax, only far more costly to administer, more volatile for the economy and more economically burdensome to households,” Prentice reveals that real science and economics play no roles in the file. If they did, he would have welcomed the results of the NIPCC as an opportunity to begin the transfer of public funds away from the impossible goal of “combating climate change”, as Prentice labels the purpose of the government’s new plan, to real environmental problems such as toxic waste dump clean-up and air and ocean pollution abatement."

Read whole piece.

June 2009: "International Climate Science Coalition Expands in U.S.", by Tom Harris, Executive Director, ICSC, Environment & Climate News, May 2009

"Climate realists in the United States need a new, more effective voice for public education about the realities of climate science. ...That new voice must be known by the public and mainstream media to be nonpartisan and composed of highly reputable climate scientists. It needs to be a single-issue organization able to win the support of those who, outside of the climate debate, may otherwise be ideological opponents. It must be seen as independent from industry, politics, and other vested interests."

Read the whole piece.