14 June 2012.
Rt. Rev. Michael Langrish
Bishop of Exeter
The Bishop's Office
Exeter, EX1 1HY
Dear Bishop Langrish
Earlier in the week I listened to what you had to say following the welcome decision to withdraw the diocese's application to erect wind turbines in Devon. I see that your remarks have now been republished in The Daily Telegraph. In particular, it is striking that you consider that you and your staff were subjected to abuse by objectors. Well, I was not part of any such exchanges and do not condone, in your own words, 'bullying tactics'. On the other hand, I cannot help pointing out - to a churchman and so an ethical standard bearer, most especially - that such tactics are an absolutely routine component of the dialectical arsenal favoured by climate change proselytisers, amongst whose ranks the prelatariat of all denominations have constituted a prominent and discreditable cadre of alarmist partisans. Accordingly, whilst I will certainly not stoop to the use of opprobrious language, neither do I have any intention of pulling punches simply in deference to 'the cloth', if I may so put it.
Monday, 14 May 2012 Marita Noon
And subsidy-dependent wind energy supporters are running scared
The wind energy industry has been having a hard time. The taxpayer funding that has kept it alive for the last twenty years is coming to an end, and those promoting the industry are panicking. Perhaps this current wave started when one of Big Wind’s most noted supporters, T. Boone Pickens, said in an MSNBC interview, “I’m in the wind business…. I lost my ass in the business.”
But the industry’s fortunes didn’t get any better when the Wall Street Journal wrote an editorial titled, “Gouged by the wind,” in which they stated: “With natural gases not far from $2 per million BTU, the competitiveness of wind power is highly suspect.” Citing a study on renewable energy mandates, the WSJ noted that states with renewable energy mandates “paid 31.9% more for electricity than states without them.”
Published in The Dominion Post (Wellington), 21 May 2012
You’re pretty entrenched in the “catastrophic human-induced global warming” fraud, aren’t you?
What would it take to cause you to actually behave like an investigative institution?
NZCPR Submission on the Emissions Trading Scheme Review
1. THIS SUBMISSION IS FROM:
Dr Muriel Newman on behalf of the New Zealand Centre for Political Research
I have read the consultation document regarding updates to the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme. It was all about HOW this onerous scheme (estimated to cost the average NZ household $1500/year for starters) could be implemented, but nothing about WHETHER it should be implemented. Apparently, that’s a subject that’s not open to discussion, since Nick Smith directed the Panel last year as follows:
"The review panel should NOT focus on:
Please add my name to those requesting that the ETS/carbon tax scheme end as soon as possible.
Recent more responsible research has cast doubt on the whole basis for the scheme.
We are experiencing the end of an ice age, and the human component is so miniscule that it will
never be measurable.
PLEASE REMEMBER, THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE COULD BE PACKED INTO ONE CUBIC MILE, AND
APPEAR AS NO MORE THAN ONE PIXEL ON A GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE.
STOP THE HUBRIS!