Litter, smell and vermin plague tip’s neighbours

The Wanganui Chronicle continues to report on the submissions hearing in Feilding this past week…

Litter, smell and vermin plague tip’s neighbours

By laurel.stowell@wanganuichronicle.co.nz

Litter, smell and vermin from the Bonny Glen Landfill will only increase if it is expanded, Linda O’Neill says.

She and her husband Chris live in one of the closest houses to the Midwest Disposals landfill near Marton. On Thursday they made a submission to the hearing considering whether to allow it to expand.

They oppose the full extent of the expansion, and especially the full 160m height the “mountain of rubbish” would attain.

When they bought their property in 2008 they didn’t know the landfill could expand. At that stage it was due to close either in 2028 or when it was full – whichever happened first….. READ THE ARTICLE HERE

If you care about your health … (or …. ‘watch out for the additives’)

Somebody I know locally, as we discussed food and what’s in it these days, handed me an additive list she takes shopping with her so she knows which items to avoid. The list comes from an excellent website I’d not seen before … and one which is closer to home for Kiwis. The site is www.additivealert.com.au

Described there are, of 300 additives in our food, 60 that are particularly questionable, and some pose definite health risks. Some of them are known carcinogens. They advertise a book there called ‘Additive Alert’ by Julie Eady.

“This book is the essential consumers guide to selecting
food that is as risk free as current knowledge will permit. Presenting a well thought out and logical flow of information, it is easy to read and understand. “Additive Alert” makes real healthy food choices simpler for us all.
An absolute must for the health conscious.”
Dr Joanne Samer MB.BS, Post Grad Dip Health Science, Perth WA

Like the EWG site, you can search these & identify the side effects of additives. One for instance is number 102, called Tartrazine, and is linked to hyperactivity, skin rashes, migraines, behavioural problems, thyroid problems and chromosome damage. It has been banned in Norway and Austria.

Check out the website and add it to your favourites if you find it useful. In addition, if you find additives in your favourite products, vote with your wallet, obviously, and don’t buy, but also, consider phoning the makers of these products and ask that they desist from using the additive/s. If they won’t, tell them you won’t buy them. Consider, if every consumer did this, things would change fairly quickly:  Visit  Additive Alert 

Company expects tougher rules in landfill expansion

From the Wanganui Chronicle … article by Zaryd Wilson as the submissions hearing continues in Feilding …

Company expects tougher rules in landfill expansion

By Zaryd Wilson

EXPANSION PLANS: The resource consent hearing to expand the Bonny Glen landfill began in Feilding yesterday. PHOTO/ BEVAN CONLEY 160215WCBRCBONN02
EXPANSION PLANS: The resource consent hearing to expand the Bonny Glen landfill began in Feilding yesterday. PHOTO/ BEVAN CONLEY 160215WCBRCBONN02

“Bonny Glen is an essential piece of regional infrastructure and new consents will provide greater environmental protection – that’s the view of Midwest Disposals, which wants to expand its waste operation there significantly.

The consent hearing for the expansion of the landfill near Marton began in Feilding yesterday in front of three independent commissioners, with the landfill company putting its case first.” ….

Read the article at its SOURCE:

~ Rangitikei Environmental Health Watch ~

Submitters not given time slots at hearing

Submitters not given time slots at hearing

By Zaryd Wilson

Submitters on the extension to the Bonny Glen landfill are having to “put their lives on hold” because they haven’t been given a time slot to speak at a resource consent hearing.

A hearing is under way in Marton on the proposed extension of the landfill near Marton.

Rangitikei District councillor Soraya Peke-Mason, who on Monday said the decision to hold the hearing outside Rangitikei was an “insult”, has again criticised the process. She said many submitters in her Turakina Ward were still waiting for a time slot…. read the full article HERE

Comment:

I agree with the concerns outlined to date. The venue to begin with is totally impractical for people who are working or unable to travel this distance daily for the 9 days of the hearings. As has been pointed out in this article, folks are waiting around for a time slot. All of this works against a fair and democratic process. The professionals involved in this process, the people who have spent $1.5 million investing in it and defending it … their salaries will continue and time off work for them is not required. It is their work. The folk who will have to live with these important decisions being made here, are having stumbling blocks put in their way. How many employers are going to freely give these folk time off their work to participate? Who is going to take valuable vacation time off to tend to business? Ordinary people need to survive. Having negotiated these obstacles they are now forced to wait around in uncertainty to speak.

And how difficult can it be to arrange this locally, within reach of the participants, with a practical timetable made well in advance of the event so folks can prepare accordingly? Clearly the decision to hold the even in Feilding has come as a complete  surprise going by Cr Peke-Mason’s criticisms on Feb 16th. Let’s face it, these decisions involve not only the lives of those making submissions, but the lives of their children and grandchildren. Midwest is seeking for consents for a quadrupled landfill with a life span of over 30+ years. It’s very clear here who is the dog and who is the tail in this process.

~ Rangitikei Environmental Health Watch ~

How GMOs and Glyphosate Get Approved

Kiwis in particular readily use glyphosate, the active ingredient in the popular product called Roundup, because it is advertised as ‘safe’ and ‘biodegradable’. Glyphosate is an integral part of the GE food industry because it is sprayed on GM crops. The seeds for those crops are genetically modified to tolerate the herbicide, therefore it becomes ingested by whoever eats it. However, France’s highest Court has ruled that Monsanto lied about its safety and has deceived the public. Roundup/Glyphosate is not biodegradable. This brief video explains how the industry works  to promote the view that it is safe. The following short video (3 1/2 minutes) is from http://www.naturalhealth365.com

http://www.naturalhealth365.com offers this exclusive interview with Jeffrey Smith, a leading consumer advocate promoting the health benefits of non-GMO food choices.

Video highlights include:

How genetically engineered foods got approved. (shocking facts!)

Suspicious Food and Drug Administration behavior exposed.

The scientifically-proven health dangers associated with eating GMOs.

Revealing truths about the most dangerous (genetically modified) chemical on the planet.

Plus, much more!

In less than 4 minutes, this video is packed with lifesaving information for you and your family. Help us spread the word and share this video with everyone.

To hear the entire interview with Jonathan Landsman and Jeffrey Smith plus much more – join us inside the NaturalNews Inner Circle, a monthly subscription – by clicking the link below:
http://www.naturalnews.com/NaturalNew…

To learn more about glyphosate and its dark side, and to become active in persuading the Rangitikei District Council to restrict its use in the Rangitikei, visit the glyphosate page on this site by clicking this LINK

Cr Soraya Peke-Mason calls Bonny Glen hearing location an ‘insult’

Bonny Glen hearing location an ‘insult’

This article is from the Wanganui Chronicle regarding  the venue for the submission hearings …. Rangitikei District Council’s Soraya Peke-Mason has slammed the decision for hearings to be held in Feilding ….

By zaryd.wilson@wanganuichronicle.co.nz

“Soraya Peke-Mason has slammed a decision to hold a hearing on the expansion of the Bonny Glen landfill outside the district, calling it an “insult” to Rangitikei ratepayers.

Midwest Disposals Ltd, which runs the landfill near Marton, has applied for resource consents with Rangitikei District Council and Horizons Regional Council to expand the operation…..” read the full ARTICLE HERE

Bonny Glen Landfill Submissions: What Midwest Disposals is Not Responsible For

In true corporate style Midwest Disposals has (quite legitimately & legally) managed to sidestep most of the very issues the average person would be concerned enough about to make a submission. With just two weeks to wade through 1500 pages of legalese, after the announced application for consent to quadruple in size back in May 2014, 60+ people braved it and did just that. However (and knowing this in advance would’ve been useful) any concerns about increased truck traffic, property values and the leachate disposal … well they’re the responsibility of, not Midwest, but the NZ Transport Agency, RDC and Horizons… and RDC incidentally have already failed to keep consistent and accurate records about leachate volumes being dumped in the Waste Water Treatment Plant … and Horizons appear to have done little about that besides slap them on the wrist with a wet bus ticket. (In case you missed that item of news it appeared a few days before Christmas in the Wanganui Chronicle). Close examination of the consent compliance forms reveals regular non compliance with little if anything in the way of consequences. So neither of these organizations it appears, is doing their job properly.

Regarding the submission issues, the operative words are … (this from your RDC & Horizons representatives)… ‘maybe’ and ‘might’. On the important issue of property prices, “the RMA focuses on the direct effects of the proposal which, depending on their severity, may in turn affect property prices, therefore devaluation of property is a secondary effect”.

Regarding the nuisance of truck traffic through town, Midwest says it is not their responsibility what route the trucks use. It is stated that this is the heavy traffic bypass. Perhaps this needs to be reviewed then. No doubt when that route was originally designated as such, the volume would have been a lot less. Given a member of the public has counted a conservative estimate of 35 trucks in a morning, surely an alternative rural route could now be designated for heavy traffic that is headed to the landfill.

There was also complaint about the refuse dropping off trucks. It’s reported that this is the responsibility of the Transport Agency …  so people need now to be vigilant in reporting, until this is satisfactorily dealt with.

As to volume of truck traffic,  a trucking report last year (links in updates here) assured the public they didn’t anticipate an increase … even though the rubbish volume was set to quadruple. I wonder how this will be achieved?

As to animal deaths. Midwest is agreeing to pay for deaths of stock for which refuse has been proven to be the cause via an autopsy. Should there be no proof arising from the autopsy then the farmer pays. So it is a matter of gambling with that cost and for many I suspect it will be more cost effective to flag the autopsy and write it off as a loss.

Midwest also intends to make a formal agreement with the RDC regarding leachate disposal instead of the former ‘gentleman’s agreement’. Which is what should have been done in the first place. For 8+ years, who knows how much leachate has gone into the waterways that has been beyond acceptable levels? We may never know. Is anybody at all concerned?

Submissions will be heard in Feilding this week, 17 February 2015. Information can be viewed on Horizons Website HERE

You can read the Chronicle article HERE

Masterton DC … Not Cost Effective to Argue Down Midwest Disposals’ Increase in Gate Fees

Bonny Glen Landfill
Midwest Disposal’s Bonny Glen Landfill near Marton

In spite of a prior pricing agreement with Midwest Disposals, a report by the Masterton District Council’s Finance Manager David Paris (December 2014) has detailed an unexpected cost increase in gate fees to take effect from Jan 1st this year. The district’s three Wairarapa Councils have an agreement with Midwest to accept their solid waste that extends to 2018 and includes fixed pricing. This increase in the gate fee of $3/tonne was justified by Midwest on the basis that they need to cover the increase and cost of NZ Carbon Units, part of the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) that came into effect from 1 January 2013. Under this scheme operators are required to purchase credits based on tonnage.

Masterton Council expressed at their meeting that they believe they have grounds to dispute the increase (you can read the full details in the Council records at this linklegal costs and expert advice would negate any savings that could be achieved by arguing the cost down. (There is a clause in the agreement that allows Midwest to pass on other levies.)

Prices were to increase from 1 February 2015, allowing time for operators to be advised of the changes. The cost would also be passed on to domestic consumers and prices for trailers, vans and utes would be increased. And kerbside bags, not yet, but will be looked at in the next review.

Here we have a classic example of low-key corporate bullying. This company whose actions the Council believed they had the grounds to dispute did not do so … purely on the basis that the whole exercise would be too expensive and therefore not cost effective. And as always in these cases the cost is recouped from the consumers.  So here we have a precedent; any other binding agreement Midwest chooses to renege on in the future, they can, for exactly the same reason … the financial cost is too high for a Council budget to oppose. This makes a laughing stock of any agreement really. What is an agreement worth if it’s not binding? Why even make one if you have no intentions of sticking to it? This is the reality of corporate license.

Back in 2009 the Wairarapa News reported on the impact rubbish disposal prices were having on low income residents. It was said then that because the Masterton District Council has opted to go for the user-pays model, people were having to pay upfront for council bags and at the tip face, and for many that was a good $10 out of a $60 per week budget for food. These changes were initiated in 2005 with the proposed closure of their Nursery Road tip.

Clearly the cost of rubbish disposal is hitting people evidenced by the regular dumping of refuse around public street receptacles, clothing bins and along roadsides outside of town and city boundaries.

SOURCE ARTICLE LINKS:

Masterton District Council Meeting minute (Dec 2014) http://mstn.govt.nz/council/meetings/2014/December/215_14.pdf

Masterton rubbish collection in for radical changes (2005)

 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wairarapa-times-age/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503414&objectid=10923408

Rubbish costly for the vulnerable (2009): http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/local-papers/wairarapa-news/3095574/Rubbish-costly-for-the-vulnerable

Masterton dump costs set to rise (Dec 2014)

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wairarapa-times-age/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503414&objectid=11371764

Energy Firm Caught Breaking Down Door to Install Smart Meter!

Here we have an excerpt from the award winning Take Back Your Power movie by Josh del Sol, that illustrates the lengths to which power companies are going to enforce installation of the new, dangerous ‘Smart Meters’, also known here as ‘Advanced Meters’. It is well documented that they are a proven health risk. Health Professional, Dr David Carpenter has said that “… we have evidence from a whole variety of other sources of RF exposure that demonstrates convincingly and consistently that exposure to RF radiation at elevated levels for long periods of time increases the risk of cancer, increases the damage to the nervous system, causes electrosensitivity, has adverse reproductive effects, and a variety of other effects on different organ systems…”

Anecdotally I have heard local Rangitikei reports of similar persistence to that demonstrated in the above video, where power company personnel have shown up at the door as many as three separate times, to attempt to install these meters. And all this in spite of the fact that the consumer has clearly written to the company telling them they do not want one. I have also heard, since beginning my own research into Smart Meters, reports by people saying the meters make them feel unwell and their power bill has escalated sky high. When these people ask for the meter to be removed they are met with refusal. Remember, you can vote with your wallet and find a company that will replace it with a non Smart Meter. There are other options.

If you don’t have a Smart Meter yet I urge you to watch Josh del Sol’s movie and educate yourself. There is plenty of information online … and particularly in the case of NZ, visit http://www.stopsmartmeters.org.nz  There you will find out how to avoid getting a Smart Meter, how to get rid of one, the health issues associated with them and other up to date information. (Smart Meters emit radiation that has been classified as carcinogenic). For general information and further links visit this site’s Smart Meter page.

It is advised you lock up your current analogue meter if you still have one, especially if it is on the outside of your house, and put a notice on it stating you do not want a Smart Meter installed. Power companies have been known to call whilst the owner is away and install without permission. If your meter is indoors, ensure that all the occupants know not to let the power company personnel inside. And above all, write to your power company and the meter owner (they are separate companies) stating your explicit wishes not  to have a Smart Meter installed. There is no law that says you have to have one. There are forms on the stopsmartmeter site you can adapt with your own details and use for that purpose.

Knowledge is power. It is easier to prevent the installation of a Smart Meter than it is to arrange for its removal once you have one.

~ Rangitikei Environmental Health Watch ~

French law bans Wi-Fi in daycares, restricts wireless infrastructure

France has featured historically in its awareness and acknowledgement of the environmental and health dangers of herbicides with their highest court ruling that the Monsanto corporation had deceived the public with its ‘safe’ advertising of their own product, Roundup. Here they have moved again to protect the public, particularly vulnerable pre-schoolers, from wifi. The protection of our young ones is particularly important as their brains are still developing. They are being exposed to radiation from wifi in their classrooms for 5+ hours per day and daycare, often longer. This article is cited on Josh Del Sol’s website, http://www.takebackyourpower.net  (the original at http://www.lemonde.fr is in French). ~ Rangitikei Environmental Health Watch ~

Here is the French article:

Two years in the works, a new law governing public exposure to electromagnetic fields generated by wireless technology (including base stations, mobile phones, tablets, and WiFi) was adopted by the Members of the National Assembly (MNAs) on Thursday, January 29. It was passed by a majority vote, while the UDI Party abstained – except Bertrand Pancher (Meuse), who voted in favor. The UMP voted against it, seeing it as an barrier to the development of digital industries.

This new law – the first in France to establish a precautionary approach addressing the potential health risks of radio frequencies – is the result of a real obstacle course, during which its initial ambitions were seriously downgraded. The Bill, filed in January 2013 by the MNA for Val-de-Marne Laurence Abeille (Europe Ecologie-Greens) had been referred to committee by the Socialists, before returning to the National Assembly in January 2014, under a watered-down form, and then to be adopted in first reading by the Senate in June 2014.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE

GMOs, Monsanto’s RoundUp Found in Kellogg’s Froot Loops

Now, we know that most folks think Roundup is so safe you can drink it. A local farmer told me when it was first introduced back in the ’70s it was advertised as being as safe as ‘Sunlight Liquid’ dishwash. If you really think it’s safe, visit the Glyphosate page on this site. It has been linked by independent, peer reviewed research with many illnesses, including cancer & birth defects. Especially, read the research and watch the video from the French team of scientists who tested this product for two years on lab rats (there on the ‘glyphosate’ page). They grew enormous tumours. Monsanto tested their own product on lab rats for just three months. It was given long term approval and here we are more than 3 decades later and it is still be slathered everywhere, and particularly on GE, Roundup read crops. Many farmers use it pre harvest on their wheat. We are ingesting this stuff from many fronts. Educate yourself and spread the word.

Here is the article from the Natural Society website that says Roundup has been found in Froot Loops! No surprizes there … it’s also been found in human breast milk. It has to stop… read article on Fruit Loops, other cereals and GE foods.

READ ARTICLE HERE AT NATURAL HEALTH WEBSITE

Newly found chemicals in fracking wastewater lead to cancer

Newly found chemicals in fracking wastewater lead to cancer

Published on Jan 19, 2015 
From RT America which is the US based arm of RT, a 24-hour English-language international broadcast news network.http://rt.com/usa/

“University researchers have discovered two new pollutants in fracking wastewater that can have potentially devastating effects on waterways and those who depend on them. Professor Avner Vengosh identified both ammonium and iodide in samples taken by his team, which says that the two chemicals have never before been linked to the natural gas extraction process. Although not deadly by themselves, according to scientists, when combined with other substances used by the natural gas drilling industry, they become carcinogenic. Dr. Ken Carlson of Colorado State University explains the importance and of the findings to RT’s Ben Swann.”

Find RT America in your area: http://rt.com/where-to-watch/
Or watch online: http://rt.com/on-air/rt-america-air/

Like RT on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/RTAmerica
Follow RT on Twitter http://twitter.com/RT_America

The Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) – What Will it Mean for Kiwis?

TPPA

Are you familiar with the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement?

With our choices regarding a healthy environment becoming increasingly more constrained as corporations gain ever increasing control over governments, (or corporations that are parading as governments … NZ is a corporation and is registered as such with the SEC in Washington, along with most of our former ‘government departments’), the agreement known as the TPPA looms as an even greater threat to freedom of choice.

Limited liability corporations have morphed into giant behemoths that enjoy virtually guaranteed immunity under a body of corporate law built up over more than a century. They owe their first allegiance, not to the public, but to their own shareholders, and their number one mandate is to maximize profits.The TPPA (Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement) is an agreement that our PM intends signing on behalf of all NZ citizens, with neither our consultation nor our consent. Negotiations around this agreement  are taking place right now between our leaders and large multinational corporations in total secrecy. If signed, from the little we know that’s been gleaned from leaked documents, this trade agreement will give corporations even more control … and we New Zealanders, whom it concerns most … even less.

Read more about the TPPA and how you can become active in opposing it ….. HERE

Retired Rangitikei Farmer Describes ‘Jet Contrails’ Affecting Our Temperatures & Agriculture

A retired local farmer from Rata, Robyn Gilmour,  recently featured in a Manawatu Standard article (January 13, 2014). describing his observations of what he terms ‘jet contrails’ that create haze and smog, blocking out the sun. He says there are sometimes 40 jet trails that stay all day. Rangitikei soil is great he says, and in some parts anything can be grown, but he believes jet vapour trails are blocking out the heat. They are causing cooler temperatures and preventing our region from reaching its horticultural potential he says.

Rata in its day was a thriving settlement. More recently in the 60s and 70s there was the potato growing industry where Goymour worked as a foreman for James Bull’s company (later sold to Watties). Earlier again Rata had a store, a post office and a Dairy Factory which after closing (as all the rural dairy factories did) became a sausage skin factory for a number of years. The settlement on the main road has all but disappeared now.

(Note: featured image is by the author, captured in March 2014 in the Rangitikei)

Read the article HERE 

Pinkwash – baleage wrap conceals true cause of rural cancer

Glyphosate in Roundup, the spray that Kiwis love to slather everywhere… an older post but a reminder of the need to educate yourself. Classified by WHO as a probable carcinogen.

Press release 8.1.15
Food Matters Aotearoa
Pinkwash – baleage wrap conceals true cause of rural cancer
desiccation with Roundup, a leading cause of rural health problems. Exposure to Roundup has be shown to increase incidence of female cancers and reproductive problems and male problems such as infertility and prostate cancer.(2)
Have you noticed the eye-catching pink wrap now appearing in paddocks around you? Agpac’s admirable action in donating a percentage of the price of each roll to the Sweet Louise breast cancer charity highlights the health problems facing rural families.(1)  Read Full ARTICLE HERE

Note details too at the end of the article, regarding the upcoming Food Conference in Wellington (Feb 2015) with Professor Seralini, Dr Meriel Watts and others.

Glyphosate-Resistant Grass Was Approved in 2014 Without Any Review

I’ve had a NZ farmer tell me he grows GM grass. He was a dairy farmer. I can’t verify this as in prove it however the man who told me, I do not believe would lie about this. NZ is not GE free as claimed going by previous information. Read our GMO pages.
EnvirowatchRangitikei

From naturalsociety.com on GMO grass approval…

“New GMO-Approved Grass may Infiltrate a Lawn Near You

The USDA has just approved a new genetically modified, glyphosate-resistant grass without a single environmental review. Apparently, Scotts Miracle-Gro company and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) thinks GMO grass, targeted for sale to golf courses and other turf-like arenas – is brilliant. The government agency just approved the new GM, glyphosate-resistant grass without a single environmental review…..”

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/new-gmo-approved-grass-may-infiltrate-lawn-near/#ixzz3OGtywcaw

As another of naturalsociety’s articles at their site says, we can kiss grass-fed beef good bye. Don’t think they won’t try that here. We already have a recent Herald article saying ‘GMO is the way to go…’ from Massey’s Peter Kemp. All the information from the independent research falls on deaf ears. What is their agenda?

Massey Researcher Seeks Farmers, Orchardists, Horticulturalists for Health Research into Sprays

From ‘Rural Women New Zealand’

“Massey University Research Nurse, Heather Duckett, wants to talk to farmers (sheep & beef, dairy, deer), orchardists and horticulturalists/flower growers in the Lower North Island from Taranaki across the Central Plateau to Hawke’s Bay and south to Wellington as part of her research into the use of sprays (pesticides, fungicides and herbicides) and the effects on health.

She wants to contact 50 farmers who either use sprays or who may enter paddocks after spraying has been done.

The research is around the higher risk these people face as an occupational group of developing blood and lymph node cancers.”

To find out more information email: H.G.Duckett@massey.ac.nz, or call (06) 350 5064.

Click here to view an Information Sheet about the study.

– See more at: http://www.ruralwomen.org.nz/news-and-inspiration/health-research-into-pesticides#sthash.zkiisGZz.dpuf

Bonny Glen: No records kept of leachate in water

Bonny Glen, near the landfill
Bonny Glen, near the landfill

No records kept of leachate in water

20 Dec 2014

This article published in the Wanganui Chronicle, 20 December reveals a ‘gentleman’s agreement’ with Midwest Disposal regarding disposal of leachate into the Marton WWT Plant. These levels we’ve been told in earlier reports are regularly exceeding acceptable levels and the Plant cannot handle them. The RDC’s record keeping on the levels disposed of has been so lax, according to this latest article, that the true environmental impact has been ‘hard to calculate’.

This ‘gentleman’s agreement’ is somewhat disconcerting and something is not right here. We have:

  • an unsigned contract that is clearly benefiting only one of the two parties and to the detriment of the other
  • as a result of this ‘agreement’ the health of the local stream being compromised
  • one of the parties (trusted with the health of the public waterways) showing itself negligent in its duty to maintain clear records about the levels of disposal …. dating back to 2006?

The community needs to connect some dots here & demand to know why this negligence regarding the health of our local environment. Why is the water being compromised?  Something is not right here … seven years of missing data, a gentleman’s agreement and now a consent application to carry on greatly increased operations for 35 more years. If that consent is granted then it needs to be with some strict adherences regarding disposal of its leachate and Council maintaining meticulous and transparent records.

An additional note, a recent report in the RangitikeiLine Bulletin (cited in the Feilding Herald, page 7, & dated August 14, 2014) regarding the volume of trucks bringing rubbish in to the landfill has concluded ‘the trucks are unlikely to become more numerous on a daily basis’ if the resource consent for an extended landfill is approved. The question needs also to be asked then, how can this add up when it is proposed the landfill’s capacity will quadruple? How can there be a continuation of the same volume of trucking with quadruple volume of rubbish?

Emoticon making decision

Local feedback suggests there is a far greater volume of truck traffic than is being cited. One observer has counted a conservative estimate of 35+ in a morning, an average of one every 10 minutes. They are loud, often smelly, often dropping refuse and often speeding it’s been reported.

It is the same with the cited frequency of the leachate trucks. It’s said in the article cited above that a leachate truck dumps leachate once every second day, whereas an observer on the truck’s route presumably (in comments at the end of the article) has observed a leachate truck passing up to three times a day.

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE

Dr Krüger: Glyphosate is Toxic to Dairy Cows

“Field Investigations of Glyphosate in Urine of Danish Dairy Cows

NZ, where Glyphosate is an integral part of farming
NZ, where Glyphosate is an integral part of farming

A new study by  a team of scientists led by Dr Monika Krüger has revealed that Glyphosate (Roundup) is toxic to the normal metabolism of dairy cows…”

Here is yet another study revealing the toxicity of Glyphosate. Read the full article HERE, at ‘GMO Evidence’, and/or download the actual study from the Journal of Environmental & Analytical Toxicology.

And in the meantime, from Reuters

USDA report says pesticide residues in food nothing to fear

Note in this article … “Last year, Monsanto Co, the developer of Roundup, requested and received EPA approval for increased tolerance levels for glyphosate…” and… as usual the USDA don’t test for Glyphosate… so who knows how much is in our food? Now bear in mind why Glyphosate gets such free reign:

MonsantoandUSGovernment.

Feedback on Bonny Glen Landfill – The Trucks

The Trucks

Bonny Glen Landfill
Bonny Glen Landfill

I struck up conversation  with a person recently in the supermarket as one does in a rural town. In chatting about the truck traffic to the Bonny Glen landfill I was told that on an average morning (this person counts) there could be as many as 35 trucks passing to or from the tip. Now that’s a modest estimate I was told as there are other trucks coming and going which look like dump trucks heading to Bonny Glen but may not be so they were excluded in the count. What the person noted of concern is the smell (one company’s trucks in particular smells), the dropping or flying off of bits of refuse, their excessive speed at times and their noise. They can be heard as early as 5:30am, waking the household. The day 35 trucks were logged began at approximately 8am and finished around 1:30pm, although trucks were still passing beyond that time, theyjust stopped counting. This then averages one every 10 or so minutes! This is on one of the routes, a street that is in town and well populated. Bear in mind … the consent application sees the volume of rubbish quadrupling … do the sums. Not pretty for those on the truck routes.

For further info or if you have concerns about any fallout from the landfill that you are experiencing and would like to make known, please go to the Bonny Glen Page and/or the sub page ‘Local Feedback’. 

Presentation to Rangitikei District Council Re Chemical Spraying in Public Places

On November 27th I presented to the Council Forum information (including credible research) regarding the need for some parameters around the spraying of chemical sprays in public places. Click on the documents to read:

Information presented to Council Forum on 27 Nov 2014
Information presented to Council Forum on 27 Nov 2014

Roundup forum presentation, picture image for site0002

Of the twelve Councilors, two are interested in this issue. Clearly convincing people of the authenticity of the independent research is a hard sell. People will either not look at the research or they just don’t believe it … even the long term research of Scientists, Doctors and Professors in their respective fields … unmoved by the obvious conflict of interest that exists in Monsanto testing their own product. The product is not safe. Please read the expanded information on Professor Seralini’s two year long experiment on rats on the Glyphosate page.    Monsanto tested their product prior to release for the required 90 days. Further to this, the following information offered by Dr Meriel Watts from Auckland (see PANANZ website & also link at the end) highlights quite explicitly the problem with the initial approval of glyphosate and Roundup. It follows a govt submission she has recently made regarding very high pesticide levels found in NZ’s baby food (800 times higher than the EU’s). She states that the testing of pesticide levels including Glyphosate, are industry funded, and therefore subject to a conflict of interests. I cite that info here:

1) No critical study in these vital toxicity assessment areas, that form the parameters used to approve our daily consumption, our RfDs / ADI’s, are ever supplied by an independent organisation like, say a university or public interest group.

2) Every animal study for glyphosate (the pesticide commonly known as Roundup) that the USA EPA and the WHO use to apply the ‘non-carcinogenic to humans’ rating, is sponsored and paid for by an agrichemical company.

3) The toxicity studies for glyphosate (Roundup) are all private, obtained directly from contracted laboratories that only work with industry – Product Safety Laboratories, Dow, ABC and Covance. They are unpublished and unavailable for review by public sector health representatives or individuals.

4) The very studies that provide the parameters that end up being residue levels, within toxicity assessment, are only ever supplied by the very organisations that require the toxicity assessment to be declared safe.  In the case of glyphosate, the studies for proving non-carcinogenicity are only ever provided by Syngenta, Monsanto and Cheminova.

5) Furthermore, no study ever uses the stronger, more effective complete formulation of Roundup, (only the weaker active chemical glyphosate is used).   And I believe this ‘policy’ has profound ramifications for our health.

This is precisely why the lack of parameters around spraying Glyphosate and any other chemical sprays concerns me.

Full article & references go here: http://www.rite-demands.org/make-it-safer-blog/

A book by Dr Watts on pesticides and the vulnerability of children is now in our local Marton library or can be found on the pananz website. The title is ‘Poisoning our Future: Children and Pesticides’  http://www.panap.net/sites/default/files/Poisoning-Our-Future-Children-and-Pesticides.pdf

Climate Change HOAX exposed by Geologist straight to the UK Govt

Transcript:

Professor Ian Plimer

Geologist & author of ‘Heaven & Earth, Global Warming: The Missing Science’

Professor Plimer, thank you for coming.

I’m a Geologist, and the one thing that we miss out on in looking at climate change is the past. Climates have always changed. Climate changes in the past have been greater and faster than anything we experience in our lifetimes. And sea levels have always changed. Not by the modest couple of millimeters that people are having connections about, but we’ve had in the past sea level changes of only 1500 meters. That’s a sea level change. And if we look back in the history of time, the atmosphere once had a very large amount of carbon dioxide in it. It’s now got less than .04%. Where did that carbon dioxide go to? It went into chalk, limestone, gels and life, and we’ve been sequestering carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere for only 10,500 million years. This planet has been de-gassing carbon dioxide since it first formed on that first Thursday 4,567 thousand million years ago. Carbon dioxide is a natural gas. It has dominated the atmosphere for an extraordinarily long period of time. And we now are at a dangerously low level.  If we halved the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere we would have no terrestrial plants. Carbon dioxide is plant food. It is not a pollutant. To use words like pollution with carbon dioxide is misleading and deceptive. But the past gives us a wonderful story. In the past we’ve had six major ice ages. We are currently in an ice age. It started 34 million years ago when Sth America had the good sense to pull away from Antarctica and there was a circum polar current set up which isolated Antarctica and we started to get the Antartic ice sheet. We’ve had periods of glaciation & interglacials. We are currently in interglacial. And during that 34 million years we have refrigerated the earth. But for less than 20% of time we have had ice on planet earth. The rest of the time it’s been warmer and wetter, and there’s been more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. And what did life do? It thrived. Six of the six great ice ages were initiated when the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere was higher than now, in fact up to a thousand times higher. So we have from the geological evidence absolutely no evidence that carbon dioxide has driven climate. For some odd reason the major driver of climate is that great ball of heat in the sky which we call the sun. That’s … you heard of heat first, that’s really quite unusual, and we change our distance from the sun. Every hundred thousand years our orbit changes from elliptical to circular. And we have a cycle of 90,000 years of cold & 10,000 years of warm. We’re in one of those warm cycles now. And every 43,000 years the axis of the earth changes a little bit, and every 21,000 years we get a little bit of a wobble. Each of those orbital events puts us further from the sun. Every now and then we get bombarded by cosmic rays, coming from the super nova eruptions somewhere out there, and if the sun’s magnetic field cannot drive these away, we start to form low level clouds. We’ve got extremely good evidence that this process has been going on for a very long period of time. Every now and then continents start to move, and they move at very rapid rates. They move about (holds hands up to measure) 8 inches every year. And at one time a continent can be over a pole and at another time it can be at the equator. Those moving continents change the major heat balance on the earth. And that’s the ocean currents, the oceans carry far more heat than the atmosphere. Every now and then because of major geological processes we get a great bulge on the ocean floor of new volcanic rock. That changes ocean currents. Every year we have 10,000 cubic kilometers of sea water that goes through new volcanic rocks in the ocean floor. That exchanges heat. The reaction between sea water and the rocks stops the oceans becoming acid. When we run out of rocks the oceans will become acid, but don’t wait up, it will be a long time. We see 1500 terrestrial volcanoes on planet earth. We only measure 20 of them. And very few of those measurements are really accurate, but they tell us that a little bit of carbon dioxide leaks out of those volcanoes. But what we don’t hear is that there are at least 3.74 million volcanoes on the sea floor which leak out huge amounts of carbon dioxide. We have got pools of liquid carbon dioxide on the sea floor. So early earth’s carbon dioxide, where did it go? It went into rocks. Where did it come from? It came from rocks. What did it do to the planet? We did not fry and die, we didn’t have runaway greenhouse. Well that’s just geology. That’s not important so let’s look at more modern times we’ve had drill cores that have gone through the ice sheets. Snow when it falls captures some air. That air is then trapped in the ice and we can later extract it from drill core and measure the amount of carbon dioxide in the air. And we can see with our cycles of glaciation  and interglacials that when we finish an interglacial event, then we release carbon dioxide some 800 years later. So, what’s that telling us? It’s telling us that temperature’s driving carbon dioxide, not that carbon dioxide is driving temperature. Oh yes but that’s only hundreds of thousands of years ago. Forget that. Well let’s go to more modern times. We’ve been measuring temperatures accurately since 1850 and the accuracy’s plus or minus one degree Celsius as ancient measurements. We have been told that this point seven degrees Celsius rise is going to create a disaster. I’ve only got to move over to here (steps one step right) and I’ve had a point 7 degrees temperature rise. Where do you people go for your summer holidays? You go to a warmer climate. We like warm climate. If someone from Helsinki moves to Singapore there’s an average temperature rise of 22 degrees Celsius. Singaporians don’t drop dead in the streets from the temperature. So we are creatures of warm climate, and we have been measuring temperature and we have seen a slight warming from 1860 to 1890, then a slight cooling til 1910 then a warming until 1940 so much so that the North West Passage was open. Then a cooling until 1977, and then a warming until the end of the century and now we’re in a period of cooler. So we’ve had these cycles of warming and cooling. Strange that these cycles are actually related to changes in the heat balance in the oceans. So we have these 60 year cycles over a long warming event. We are in a period of global warming. It has been warming since the minimum 330 years ago. These are the times when you had the ice fairs on the Thames. These are the times when the Dutch Masters painted hoar frosts and bitterly cold conditions. That was the time when the sun was a bit inactive & we had no sun spot activity. So we’re in a long period of warming and one of the questions that I ask in this book, which part of the last 330 years of warming is due to human activity? And which part is natural? This is the question that kids should ask their school teachers and they’re deliberately unanswerable questions. Because I am of the view that many children are getting fed environmental propaganda in the schools and are not being given the critical and analytical facilities to be able to dissect the argument. So we’re in a period of warming. What’s the worry? It’s quite normal. And let’s just look at history. The one thing that the climate industry, which it is, ignores, is history. In Roman times, it was warm, it was considerably warmer than now. We know that. They kept good records. They grew olives up the Rhine river as far as Bonne. They had wine grapes in Yorkshire. We know from their clothing that it was warm. Possibly they were going to an orgy but I think it more likely it was warm. And that warming suddenly stopped in 535 AD. And we entered the Dark Ages. And in 535 AD we had Krakatoa filling the atmosphere with aerosols. And it wasn’t a big volcanoe. Only 30 cubic kilometers of aerosols going into the atmosphere. We’ve had bigger ones. Yellowstone. We’ve had even bigger ones in NZ where 10,000 cubic kilometers of aerosols have gone into the atmosphere, and we pray for another one because that’s the only way we’ll ever beat them at Rugby. Wipe them out! We had two volcanoes, one in Rubal and one in Krakatoa in Indonesia in 535, 536. We went into the Dark Ages. It was cool. What happened? Crops failed. We starved. We had civil unrest. We had cannibalism. We broke out of that, into the medieval warming. First afield it was the Vikings. The sea became calmer. They could go further fishing. They actually went to New Finland which they called Vinland. In Greenland, grapes and barley were growing. In Greenland the graves were deep because there was no permafrost. It was a wonderful benign climate. Five degrees warmer than now. Eric the Red was saying ‘come to Greenland, it’s a wonderful climate’ and it was. And then we went through a period of silent inactivity and in 23 years we went from the medieval warming into the little ice age. And that little ice age ended 330 years ago. So what do you think would happen after a little ice age? Would it get colder or do you think it would get warmer? The only reason that the arguments of  science have got any traction in society is that they have been related to the last 30 years or 40 years of temperature measurements. I see with great interest the Met office is telling us  that this is the hottest year on record, but you might be on a different calendar to me  but I don’t think this year’s finished yet and this time last year I was in London as I was the time before the year before and it was miserable, it was cold, it was very cold. So those sort of predictions made just before a climate conference, one has to be very skeptical of. So in science skepticism is not a pejorative word, there is no concensus. In science there are constant battles. A good example, we all knew that we got ulcers from an acid stomach and from stress & we took pills and rubbed our bellies & hoped the ulcers would go away until two scientists who were not following the mainstream, were not following the consensus  were arguing that this was due to a bacteria, and no one listened. Ultimately one of them took the bacterium, developed ulcers, took the antidote, and for that they get a Nobel Prize. You do not get a Nobel Prize for following the consensus or saying the science is settled. I believe we’ve had enormous corruption of science and the scientific method. I believe that the monies that are floating around for climate research, which is a current fad and fashion are quite perverse. I believe we’re putting science backwards. And come the next inevitable pandemic we may not have the weapons to handle it. We might go waving herbs and chanting rather than creating an antidote. So this for me, this climate industry has been a huge attack on the scientific method. It has been an attack on my science, and history and things fortunately are changing. I’ll finish with one last point. You’ve got your climate change Act, we’ve just had a carbon tax in Australia. Nineteen bills went through parliament, and our carbon tax is to lower the emissions of carbon dioxide from our employment generated industries in Australia. And it’s wonderful. We’ve led the world in suicide, and our carbon tax is to knock down our emissions by 5%. Now you can do the sums, and the sums are very simple. The IPCC says that 3% of annual emissions are from humans. Why is it that 3% drives climate change and not the other 97 is beyond me but that’s another matter. Australia puts out 1.5% of the world’s CO2 emissions. You can do the calculations, and by Australia knocking back their emissions by 5% we will by the year 2050 have lowered global temperatures by 0.00007 degrees Celsius. So I do hope you enjoy our sacrifice in giving you a warmer climate here in England. Thank you.

How the Global Warming Scam Began

FULL TRANSCRIPT

I’m John Coleman and the name of this presentation is ‘There is No Significant Global Warming’. And I’m the guy that is just doggone sure of that. Now you may think that I’m just a paid off shill, Big Oil or something of that sort. No, no, no, no … they’ve never given me a nickel. I’m a television weather caster with 60 years experience … a meteorologist. I was the first weather man on Good Morning America, and the man who founded the weather channel, and this is my accomplishment… Broadcast Meteorologist of the Year, from the American Meteorological Society of which I was a professional member for many years. I finally quit the AMS when it became very clear to me that the politics had gotten in the way of the science and it was time to talk about something else. Now did we have a Winter or what in 2013, 14, oh man did we ever? When I called for my brother in Ohio, his wife said he wasn’t coming in from shoveling the snow to talk to some guy in California. How could you talk global warming when it was the coldest, bitterest, snowiest winter in 30 years which it was across the United States, and it would take a lot of gall to put out a statement as our NOAA, National, Oceanic and Atmospheric agency did, claiming that 2013 was the warmest year … I mean it is sheer silliness, it is manipulation of the data. Now look, let’s get something clear right from the beginning. I love this planet earth. I’ve been a citizen of this earth now for darn near 80 years, and it’s all I got. If I thought that we, mankind, were damaging this beautiful little sphere, this blue marble on which we live, I would be terrified, and give every ounce of energy to stop what we were doing. But I have studied the issues of so-called global warming, or now they call it climate change since the warming has stopped. I have studied the issues as carefully & completely as a good scientist can, and reached an absolute firm conclusion that there is no global warming. Now this earth, it’s spinning around the sun at 17,000 miles per hour. It is travelling with the sun, in our little spiral, off the Milky Way Galaxy, at over 100,000 miles an hour, and that galaxy is flying out in the universe, as the big bang continues to expand the universe, and we are all travelling very very fast. What a ride. The earth has been travelling for four and a half billion years, and as best I can tell it’s going to stay just fine for another four billion years, but wait a minute. During that period we have had Ice Ages, and we have had inter-glacial periods, and we’re going to continue to have those natural variations in climate, but man-made climate change? I’m sure it’s not going to happen. That’s why I sent out this Tweet today. This Tweet went out to Al Gore, it went out to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change of the United Nations, to the Seierra Club, to the Democratic Party National Committee. And what it said is, where is your so called global warming, because if you chart the temperatures, you can go back into the ‘70s and come up to today, and there’s almost no warming, I mean less than one degree warming since 1978, and absolutely no warming since 1998! What kind of deal is that? Well I’ll tell you what kind of deal it is. It’s the kind of deal that’s full of silliness if you’re promoting climate change and global warming. We are in one of the most stable and beautiful periods of earth’s climate you could hope for. And look at the stark contrast between the spaghetti of the many mottles of atmospheric warming created by various people who’ve gotten tens of millions of dollars of federal grant money and worked for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change … and there’s the average of all their models, and then here’s the real temperatures as measured both on earth and with our satellites, and folks, it’s just not happening. That’s why I posted on Facebook, this memo today, to the scientists and organizations that take that 4.7 billion dollars a year tax money to continue your so called global warming research, and I say to them, it’s bad science. Ladies and gentlemen, please cease and desist that global warming and climate change scare campaign, it’s harmful to the continued advancement of our civilization. The government actions to counter so called carbon pollution, have already raised the cost of food, electricity and fuel by an average of thousand dollars a year for the average American family of four and, the 4.7 billion dollars of our tax money a year being issued to you and your organizations is funding a wide range of meaningless studies based on this bad science that says that carbon dioxide is causing warming. That money could be productively spent on energy research, including  thorium and other new energy sources. Your manipulated climate computer models have dramatically failed both in temperature predictions and their predictive warming signatures. Please admit your errors, it’s time to put principles above personal wealth and status and help restore basic scientific principles to climate research. So I posted the memo, I sent the tweet. I know you are highly skeptical of what I’m saying, how can you believe me when you see this constant stream of global warming news reports day after day, year after year, printed on the internet sites, in all the newspapers, they still print with ink on paper and roll it up and throw it on your driveway… send it in a magazine … and it’s full of this stuff … even our government, our National Oceanographic Atmospheric Agency of the Federal government has established websites to promote climate change, and of course the New York Times it’s been reading that all along … and that’s the power of money. That four point seven billion dollars a year is buying all of this bogus research that is leading to all of these bogus reports. So let me just give you the hard cold facts. I showed you this when I tweeted it … there isn’t any warming going on, there hasn’t been …. Nothing significant is happening, oh we have extreme natural variations in temperature, that’s a hard cold fact, but this recent warming, it’s no different than the warming that’s occurred many times before naturally. We had a medieval optimum when the Roman Empire flourished, and we had the little Ice Age when times were very tough. This little warming we have now? It’s no big deal, it’s no big deal. Now you want to talk about big deals … this is a hard cold fact, from the ice cores, we have determined that we have vacillated on earth between extreme ice ages and these beautiful inter glacial periods of warming weather, and we live in the most recent of these inter glacial periods, we’ve been in it for 12,000 years, probably have another 10, 12,000 years to go before the next ice age comes on naturally, and can we cope with that? Now you hear about the ice melting at the North Pole. What ice melted at the North Pole? It got pretty low in 2007 but this is the last bunch of years since we’ve had satellite observation, about 35 years, and here’s where the ice is now and it’s no big deal. And those polar bears, there are more polar bears living today than have been alive any time since we’ve been counting them, and they’re living all around the North Pole in 19 populations, they’re doing just fine, that’s a hard cold fact. How about the South Pole, well our South Pole as I record this is in Summer time so the ice melt is near the peak for the season, there’s more ice there than above average, it’s near an all time high. Oh, but the water is rising! Along the coast. Is that right? Well it’s rising at about the rate of 6 inches per hundred years as part of this interglacial period. I mean when North America was covered in a four hundred foot thick ice core at the end of the last ice age the oceans were low and then the ice melted and of course the oceans have risen but that rise has been gentle and it’s not important. And then, oh, the super storms … we didn’t have a hurricane hit the US in 2013, the year before only a meager effort and that so called super storm Sandy, it was no big deal as hurricanes go, it didn’t compare with Katrina, didn’t compare with Andrew, and neither of those compared with the Galveston hurricane of 1900, long before man had any influence on climate. Oh the tornadoes, how about those tornadoes, well here’s the chart of tornadoes, strong tornadoes have been diminishing, we now have so many good radars, everybody’s taking pictures with their phones, we see every tornado it seems that form, but folks, there are fewer, and less strong. And drought, well we had a big drought in Texas that vanished, now we have a big drought in California getting a lot of publicity. If you look at the records California falls into drought about once every 11 or 12 years, then we get an El Nino and California gets the rain, comes out of the drought, I mean we’ve got 40 million people living in a desert, of course they’re going to have a water problem, so what, it’s natural, it’s not man made and it comes and it goes, it takes care of itself. Heat waves, what heat waves? We haven’t had a killer heat wave since the ‘50s, so I’ve brought all of these hard cold facts and presented them to you, and compared them to what you read in the press, what you hear on the air, what the networks tout and you say, man what a difference between reality and what’s there. Does Coleman know his reality? You bet I do folks, I study it every day.

But how did this strange strange bad science, how did this global warming, climate change, this crisis, how did it get started? Well that story I’m going to tell you today, that story begins with this great scientist, a man named Roger Revelle who was a graduate of the University of California at Berkley, in Oceanography in 1950, who then served in the Navy during World War II, then became director of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and who led research on the environmental impact of the atomic tests on those atolls out in the Pacific following World War II, both atmospheric & ocean impact, as that was coming to an end, he had a greatly grown the Scripps Oceanographic Institution from an isolated small organization to a huge professional organization with many ships and hundreds of employees, it became clear he had to have something new to work on, and that’s when he decided that something had to give. So he hired this man, Hans Seuss, a Professor from the University of Chicago who had done studies on the effect of carbon on the atmosphere, and Revelle thought maybe there was something to that, so he and Seuss did a research paper & they put it out, in which they asked the question, is mankind’s burning of fossil fuel, our coal and our stokers that were heating our homes, the oil in our cars, the fuel, old fashioned gasoline and old fashioned cars, was all of that creating a climate issue? That was the 1950s folks. And the world was pretty much caught in a smog. I remember as a boy, most of you are probably too young to remember, you choked in the smog that hung over your towns or winter months when those coal burning stokers were going and the cars were just spewing out ash, it was ugly. We were burning old fashioned untreated fuel in old fashioned cars. Well that was the beginning, that paper that Seuss & Revelle put out, is actually the paper that started the global warming frenzy. Oh man did they start something. And Revelle then, he became a powerful man, on the basis of that, the science was used all over the world by other scientists, and he started campaigning to establish a campus at the University of California, co located with his Scripps Oceanographic Institution at California. That was a big darn deal. Well guess what happened? It was located there but something happened. Revelle suffered the greatest defeat of his life. He had campaigned to get that university there & thought he’d be its first Chancellor. But the politics back fired on him. And he wasn’t named Chancellor of that university and he was hurt. So what did he do? He suddenly made a big move. He changed his life. He packed up and went to Harvard where he started the Centre for Population Studies. So there he was in Boston in 1967. Now what does this have to do with the global warming story? This is what it has to do with it. That first year, one of his students was this young man, Al Gore. The only science class Al Gore ever took. Revelle didn’t remember having him in class, but Al Gore who got a D in the course was highly impressed. He was the son of a politician out of Tennessee and he used what he learned there to start his global warming campaign. He wrote a book called Earth in the Balance, he ran for the US Senate, he claimed that the earth was being challenged by the burning of fossil fuels and it got him elected to the US Senate, and there in the Senate he conducted hearings, bringing in scientists and spreading the scare of global warming, & that’s when the money began to flow to the government research, and this was the booby trap, because once billions of dollars of government funding was going out to these organizations and universities & research groups from across the nation, and they had this back that global warming claim that Al Gore was promoting with their research, the research began to pile up, and if you were a young scientist you didn’t have a choice, you couldn’t put out a research paper that said, oh, what warming? You’d be out of a job, you’d lose your car, your family would be walking on the streets. No you had to support it. Al Gore had taken Revelle and Seuss’s research paper & used it to start the global warming campaign. Now what did Al Gore say? He said Roger Revelle is my mentor, he’s my hero … he’s the man who spread the alarm. Well there’s another man who picked that up. This man, Maurice Strong. Maurice had become a Democrat at the United Nations. In 1972, he had a conference in Stockholm on the environment and his whole goal was for one world government, & he used that impetus of global warming scare, at that Stockholm conference to start the initiative that set up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Now we had the US government and the United Nations both promoting climate change, & it all came from that Revelle Seuss paper and the research that followed and the dollars that were now flowing and man it was under way big time. And so the IPPC had scientists and bureaucrats & politicians from throughout the world. It had the WWF, the Sierra Club, all the environmentalists, and they all got together and they voted that global warming was for real. Well I’ve got to tell you something, you don’t sell science by a vote, it’s not a political issue, it’s not a vote, it’s science. Ah but never mind they put out their reports and they spent a lot of time telling us how we were destroying planet earth & they had fancy meetings in tropical locations throughout the world, and the scientists who supported global warming, paid vacation trips to these big meetings, & got to write these books and have their names and their careers and man it was a big deal. And what did Al Gore do? Well he wrote a second book about global warming called, ‘An Inconvenient Truth’, and we all know what became of that. His liberal friends in Hollywood turned that into a documentary, a sci fi documentary I might add, all about global warming, and they voted themselves an Oscar, best documentary film of the year in 2007, and then they turned around and Al Gore stood behind the IPCC President & they got the Nobel Peace prize. All for scaring us about global warming. So, Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth became an absolute mainstay in American schools… how many times did you see it in school? Over and over  again, and the global warming frenzy had truly reached its peak when all of that happened. Well what happened with this man, Roger Revelle who had started it all, the great scientist? Well he kind of lost interest in this Population Study Centre at Harvard and missed San Diego I guess and the beautiful Sthn California climate and he swallowed hard for his defeat there and he came back to the University of California San Diego as a Professor and  there, there he wrote these letters and I want you to look at them. The first one goes from his desk to US Congressman, Tim Worth, quote, ‘We should be careful not to arouse too much alarm about the rate and amount of warming before it becomes clear’ and he wrote another letter here to Congressman Tim Bates, ‘Most scientists familiar with the subject are not yet willing to bet that climate this year is the result of greenhouse warming. As you very well know, climate is highly variable year to year. The causes of these variations are not at all well understood. My own personal belief is that we should wait another 10-20 years to really be convinced that the green house is going to be important for human beings and in positive and negative ways. So there it was, the man who had started the global warming campaign had put up the flag of warning. ‘Hey folks, this may not be for real, caution, caution’. Well he even wrote an article that was published in a new science magazine called Cosmos. And he teamed with a Professor Ted Singer to write that article, and that article was called, ‘What to do about Greenhouse Warming: Look Before You Leap’. And the article concluded and I quote; ‘the scientific basis for a greenhouse warming is too uncertain to justify drastic action at this time’. Wow. The man who had started it? Well how did Al Gore react to that? Well he said, ‘I’ve made up my mind, Revelle is now senile, pay no attention, the debate is over’ and you’ve been hearing that now for 20 years. Al Gore won’t debate anybody and he claims it’s for real. Well we lost Revelle, he passed away of a heart attack in 1991. And after he died his family joined with the people at Scripps to make him the father of global warming. They rejected his denial and so did the UN and IPCC. But Dr Singer, he was made to be the scapegoat for it all. They said that he had caused it. Well I finally was able to interview Dr Singer about this controversy. ‘Dr Singer what was Roger Revelle’s view of carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas when you co authored that Cosmos article back in 1990?’ Reply: ‘he was very relaxed about it… he basically looked at this as a grandeur physical experiment … after he and his collaborators like David Keeling found that CO2 was in fact increasing in the atmosphere, he and his colleagues were wondering if it would have any impact on climate. He wasn’t about to make any judgement on the matter until the data were in. of course at that time, by 1990 we had about more than 10 years worth of satellite data & the satellites didn’t show any appreciable warming & this is what actually set off my own thinking on the matter. I wondered why; what was going on? After all Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, it’s increasing. There’s no question about that. Where is the warming? Well it turns out that the atmosphere is much more complicated than the climate models believed, and the warming is offset probably by a kind of negative feedback that comes from clouds and water vapour in the atmosphere. Are you saying that back in 1990 that Revelle was somewhat regretful of the excitement that he had caused about global warming? Ah Revelle, um at that time, had written some letters to his Congressmen and to Senator Worth, telling them to calm down, not get excited about it, but wait and see what would happen to the climate. In other words he was telling them, don’t assume that things are going to warm up just because the models say so. He was actually very skeptical of climate models, much moreso than I was. I was always more optimistic hoping that they would improve enough so they could really simulate what’s going on in the atmosphere. Revelle had not much faith in models. Well since that time many people have said, that you were the one that manipulated Revelle, that you kind of calmed him down or changed his feelings in the way you put that article together; that Gore said he was a senile old man when you co authored that paper, and that therefore you took your position on CO2 and more or less assigned it to Revelle and they put a lot of blame on you. Well that’s absolutely untrue. First of all if you knew Revelle, you would know that he was sharp right to the very very end and you could not change his mind … he knew what he was doing all the time. And furthermore we have written proof. We have the letters he wrote to his Congressman and the Senator, we also have an interview in Omni magazine, so there’s plenty of evidence to show that he was quite independent minded, and that he didn’t believe in global warming until the day they would show him a warming and by 1990 they really weren’t, the satellite data were not showing the warming. Did you and Revelle talk about Gore at all? Actually no we never did come to think of it. We only discussed the science. Revelle’s politics were very different from mine. He was a supporter of Gore. He was a Liberal Democrat by inclination and I think and every other way. But when it came to science, we completely agreed.

The interview that I had with Dr Singer, now he’s not the only scientist, please understand this, who questions this global warming frenzy. This climate change scare. In ****fact there are 9,000 PHDs have signed a petition denying that CO2 is causing global warming. There’s 31,000 scientists in total who have signed that petition. There is a whole organization of them. A huge group from NASA recently wrote to the UN and to the US Congress saying please stop the global warming scare. There is a strong movement opposed to global warming. You don’t hear about it in the media because the media has that Al Gore liberal bias so it becomes very tough. And at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, they gave Al Gore the first Roger Revelle award … in recognition of his environmental work.

‘We’re honoured tonight at Scripps Institute of Oceanography … he was given an award in recognition of his environmental work, KUSI Tom Jordan is live in La Hoya with more on that … Tom, Al Gore was the first ever recipient of the Roger Revelle prize here at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, honoured tonight for his work in environmental preservation. A rousing welcome for a man continuing his continuing campaign on environmental awareness and protection. Former Vice President Al Gore being honoured for his efforts with the first ever Roger Revelle prize. (Gore) ‘I want to express my very deep & genuine gratitude for this honour…. ‘

The award presented at this dinner marking the 100th birthday of the late Roger Revelle who headed Scripps Institute of Oceanography from 1958 to 1964. Gore studied under Revelle at Harvard University in the 1960s and credits him with igniting his passion on the environment.

(Gore) ‘As a former student  … still a student, trying to learn, but still inspired by a great teacher, who was a great scientist and a great man.’

Roger Revelle’s work back in the 1960s was at the time considered revolutionary. Today many scientists consider that work almost prophetic.

And at that time they wrote a short report and we were told it was a very short report saying that climate change is becoming an issue, the earth is heating up, and therefore something needs to be done about that.

Al Gore says he was deeply moved by Revelle’s early work, he now considered at the forefront of the global warming movement. A Nobel Peace Prize winner, an Oscar winning documentarian all from his work on the environment. Now he adds a new distinguished & personal honour to that list.

(Gore) I am deeply deeply grateful.

And tonight’s celebration was part of 3 days of celebrating the life of Roger Revelle. He would have been 100 years old tomorrow. We’re live in La Hoya, I’m Tom Jordan KUSI News. Thanks Tom, John Coleman believes there is no significant man-made global warming & he travels the nation speaking on the topic. John has some insights now on Roger Revelle’s scientific research and the effect that it had on Al Gore.

(Coleman) …. Well Revelle was a powerful man, a noteworthy scientist and a significant force here in San Diego in the 1950s. There’s no doubt that he’s largely responsible for the high status of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography in its field, and for locating the University of California at San Diego, and UCSD at La Hoya.

While serving as Director at Scripps Institute of Oceanography, Revelle & one of his researchers wrote the first modern scientific paper that linked carbon dioxide released into the air from the burning of fossil fuels & the greenhouse effect and the warming of temperatures. Well this triggered an avalanche of research that eventually became the impetus behind the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change & the entire global warming movement. In the 1960s Revelle moved to Harvard to establish a center for population studies. This is where Prof Revelle encountered student Albert Gore. He involved Gore & his classmates in the tabulating of data from a carbon dioxide study. Gore was so impressed he wrote about it in his 1992 book, ‘Earth in the Balance’ that became the story for the movie ‘An Inconvenient Truth’, the Oscar & the Nobel Peace Prize, and some people say one hundred million dollars all came from that. There is no doubt Roger Revelle had a major impact on Vice President Gore’s life.

(Coleman) … there’s a twist. In 1988 Roger Revelle was having second thoughts about whether carbon dioxide was a significant greenhouse gas … he wrote letters to Congressmen about it. And in 1991 he co authored a report for the new science magazine, Cosmos in which he expressed his strong doubts about global warming and urged more research before any remedial action was taken.

(News again) At that point Mr Gore pronounced Revelle senile & refused to debate global warming. He continues to refuse to debate. Many offers of thousands of dollars have been made for debate but he refuses. Today sequestered the media to set forth rules, no questions, no interviews.

(Coleman) I have learned that in 1991 Roger Revelle made what was his final speech at the high powered very private summer enclave of powerful men and politicians from Bohemian Grove in Nthn California. There he apologized for his research, for sending so man people in the wrong direction on global warming. And he worried about the political fallout from the UN IPCC and Al Gore. A man named Don Michael Schmedman who lives in the San Francisco area was there that day. And he remembers the Revelle speech very well. He has told me about it in some detail. So think of the irony today. Al Gore received the first Roger Revelle award honouring the man who sent him on his global warming campaign. But Revelle had realized that it was a false alarm and that the science was flawed before he died.

(Coleman) … Revelle  died of a heart attack in 1991. it would be interesting to know that if he had lived  would he be approving of the award that was given tonight? Or perhaps would he be joining me at the international conference of global warming skeptics in New York next week. If you want to read the article on global warming that I have written you can go to KUSI dot com, click on Coleman’s corner.

This is really interesting. We haven’t heard this information at all before.

Well I’ve done a lot of digging over the last year or two to find all of this, and really fascinated me when I stumbled across the Bohemian Grove speech … it’s not documented anywhere.

This is the first time your orbits have crossed, you and Al Gore. You’re both in the same city for 24 hours and we couldn’t get the two of you to meet.

Well Mr Gore of course is the former Vice President, he’s the man who got 52 million votes for President, served very honourably as a politician, I think he would have little regard for me.

You’d like to debate him wouldn’t you?

Well sure I’d love to debate him, but you understand, this isn’t political, I’m a journalist, a meteorologist, my interest is strictly in the science.

Thank you John.

So that’s the report, and I’m sure you’re wondering why I have I never heard of all this before? Why hasn’t the media full of it? Why do I keep hearing about global warming and its threat to our civilization? Well it’s 4.7 billion dollars a year of our tax money, and that’s the power of money. Now everything I’ve had in this report is posted, including the complete interview with the Dr Singer. You only saw part of that interview. And a lot of other material is posted on my Coleman’s Corner website at KUSI dot com. Now I’d be delighted to have you look there. I’m also a regular reader of a site called ‘What’s up with that?’ where my friend Anthony Watts hosts any number of skeptical papers on global warming, the research flows there on a daily basis. Now what’s going to defeat this global warming scare? It’s like David and Goliath. I don’t think we can defeat $4.7 billion, the Democrat Party, the UN & the Sierra Club and the Wildlife Federation and all of them. They just claim that we’re deniers and old goats and they think we’re bought and paid for by the big oil companies which we are not, we don’t have anything to do with them, but I don’t think we can defeat them. What’s going to defeat them? Time. A few more bitterly cold winters. A turn towards a colder climate. When the global warming fails to materialize in time, people will begin to believe and I have noted that recent gallup polls show that more and more people are saying, global warming that’s not the big deal. We got a lot of big deals going on, you know employment, jobs, govt too big, that sort of thing. The list of their concerns is very interesting. Those are on it. The global warming’s down toward the bottom of the list.

jcoleman@kusi.com

Kiwi investors don’t realise their deposits are no longer guaranteed

Oct 19, 2014  Bernard Hickey from the NZ Herald writes here on the ‘unseen risks of a fiscal haircut’. Most New Zealanders are not aware of the Open Bank Resolution….

Do you think the money you have in a bank term deposit is Government guaranteed? If so, you’re wrong, but you’re not alone.

A survey for the Financial Markets Authority by Colmar Brunton and published during Money Week found 52 per cent believed the money in a bank term deposit was guaranteed.

To be fair, during the global financial crisis, these deposits were guaranteed, from October 2008 to December 2011. Banks paid for the privilege, but that scheme is over now. So what would happen if a bank fell over? Would the taxpayers of New Zealand make sure you got all your money back?

The simple answer is we don’t know for sure.  READ FULL ARTICLE

The Real Reason Wheat is Toxic (it’s not the gluten)

Here is an article that traces many allergic issues back to glyphosate that is sprayed on wheat crops before harvest. A regular practice apparently that kills the plant and allows an earlier harvest. Great idea if you don’t mind ingesting a herbicide that’s been linked with many diseases including birth defects and cancer.

According to the US Department of Agriculture, as of 2012, 99% of durum wheat, 97% of spring wheat, and 61% of winter wheat has been treated with herbicides. This is an increase from 88% for durum wheat, 91% for spring wheat and 47% for winter wheat since 1998.

Read the full article  from the healthyhomeeconomist website HERE

ALERT: Certified Organic Food Grown in U.S. Found Contaminated with Glyphosate Herbicide

This is alarming. Those who buy organic and/or grow their own food to avoid glyphosate are now encountering this. It demonstrates how widespread are the reaches of this poison called glyphosate.
EnvirowatchRangitikei


 

“Think you can avoid glyphosate by buying organic? Think again. A new investigation by Tropical Traditions reveals that many products in the organic grain market in the U.S. contain glyphosate residue at levels almost the same as conventional grains.

Brian Shilhavy
Health Impact News Editor

With over 80% of the U.S. food supply now reportedly contaminated with the herbicide glyphosate, many people are turning to USDA certified organic products to avoid this toxic chemical……”

Further links from the article on glyphosate:

Glyphosate Herbicide Causes Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria, Kidney Disease, and Infertility

Is Glyphosate Responsible for your Health Problems?

Common Weedkiller Used in Modern Agriculture Could be Main Factor in Gluten Intolerance

Gluten Intolerance and the Herbicide Glyphosate: A National Epidemic

MIT Researcher: Glyphosate Herbicide will Cause Half of All Children to Have Autism by 2025

Why Should We be Concerned about Glyphosate?

Glyphosate is in 80% of our food supply in the U.S., and some scientists believe it may well be the most toxic chemical ever approved for commercial use. Glyphosate is now linked to kidney disease, antibiotic resistant bacteria, inflammatory bowel disease, obesity, depression, ADHD, autism, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, ALS, multiple sclerosis, cancer, cachexia, infertility, and developmental malformations. It destroys the microbiome of humans and plants, which is the root cause of many modern diseases.

– See more at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/alert-certified-organic-food-grown-in-u-s-found-contaminated-with-glyphosate-herbicide/#sthash.hAX9xINF.dpuf

Council probes stream health

The Wanganui Chronicle reports that Leachate from the Bonny Glen landfill is probably harming the health of the Tutaenui Stream a recent report reveals. There have been high readings of biological oxygen demand, ammonia and suspended solids regularly exceeding consented levels from the leachate that is trucked from the dump and put into the Marton waste water treatment system. There is a consent with Horizons to discharge this into the Tutaenui Stream.  Read the full article …..

Roundup linked to birth defects

New Study Shows Direct Link Between Monsanto’s Glyphosate And Birth Defects

By: Tammy Marie Rose

“Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, which contains glyphosate was linked to fatal kidney disease back in the spring.  In parts of Central America after an epidemic of fatal kidney disease Roundup was banned in El Salvador and Sri Lanka.

Now new study shows a strong link between glyphosate fetal deaths and birth defects.  Monsanto continues to stand by its product calling it a ‘safe and effective herbicide,’ but as the evidence mounts it is becoming abundantly clear that Monsanto is doing all that it can to keep the public in the dark….”

Read more: http://www.daybreakmill.com/blog/new-study-shows-direct-link-between-monsantos-glyphosate-and-birth-defects

Glyphosate (Roundup) Linked To Cancer of the Lymph Tissue In New Study

A study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health reviewing almost 30 years of research into the relationship between non-Hodgkin lymphoma and occupational exposure to pesticide active ingredients reveals a link between blood cancers in the lymph glands and the popular herbicide glyphosate also known as Roundup.

Read Sayer Ji’s article and links to the research at greenmedinfo.com

Watching our environment … our health … and corporations … exposing lies and corruption

%d bloggers like this: