Climate economist says he was 'gagged'

aap ^ | November 02, 2009 | Clive Spash

[george76]

A SENIOR CSIRO environmental economist has gone public to accuse the science body of trying to gag his report attacking the Federal Government's climate change policies.

The paper, by Clive Spash, criticises the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme and argues that direct legislation or a tax on carbon is needed...

Dr. Spash also wrote that the economic theory underpinning emissions trading schemes was far removed from the reality ...

He said trading schemes were ineffective ...

He claims the CSIRO had tried to block the publication of the report, despite it being internationally peer reviewed and accepted by the journal New Political Economy.

[steelyourfaith]

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[basil]

If my name were Clive Spash, I’d keep quiet and not draw any attention to myself.

[org.whodat]

Dr. Spash also wrote that the economic theory underpinning emissions trading schemes was far removed from the reality

That covers it.

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

“global warming” isn’t science. It’s politics.

[eclecticEel]

He seems pretty talkative for someone who was “gagged”.

[Huskrrrr]

[Always Right]

and Democrats want to characterize Republicans as anti-science.

[grandeez]

and i would advise him to stay away
from ‘stairwells’

[sourcery]

The debate actually is over…and the idea that human emissions of carbon dioxide will cause any significant degree of global warming has been categorically refuted and falsified. The empirically-measured change in the amount of energy radiating away from the Earth as a function of changes in sea surface temperature totally falsifies the IPCC climate models--and more importantly, completely falsifies the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis—total, categorical falsification, not simply invalidation of the alleged "proof" based on computer climate models:

• On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data (peer-reviewed scientific paper);
• RESPONSE TO US SECRETARY OF ENERGY ON CLIMATE STATEMENT (explanation for non-scientists)

[Stultis]

The paper, by Clive Spash, criticises the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme and argues that direct legislation or a tax on carbon is needed...

Dr. Spash also wrote that the economic theory underpinning emissions trading schemes was far removed from the reality ...

He said trading schemes were ineffective ...

I was confused. It took awhile for it to dawn on me. Apparently Clive thinks the purpose of Carbon Reduction legislation is to reduce carbon emissions.

Poor Clive just doesn't get it, does he?

Hey, Clive, how the hell is Al Gore going to make billions off a simple tax that goes straight to the government? How will Democrat contributors on Wall Street get paid back? Even though it would indeed destroy private sector jobs, how does a simple carbon tax compare to an exceedingly complex regulatory scheme, interlinked with government regulated private trading of (Al Gore supplied) carbon credits, in extending government control over industry and individuals.

Wake up and smell the fascism, Clive.

[Lancey Howard]

Yes, Clive is a very confused naif.
Hey, Clive - - it’s all about global socialism, ie., the redistribution of America’s wealth (the result of capitalism) to the rest of the losers around the planet.

[holden]

and Democrats want to characterize Republicans as anti-science

Republicans don't want to hand out open-ended, taxpayer-funded, monetary support to otherwise useless professors and their grad students to do pointless, supposedly well-meaning "research", just so those professors can continue to spew their leftist drivel and invite 0bama-minion types to give their students' commencement speeches.

HF