About the Author

Dr Muriel Newman

Dr Muriel Newman

The Dangers of Junk Science

Print Friendly and PDF
Posted on

ChocolateA few months ago the world’s media reported the astounding scientific finding that ‘eating chocolate could help you lose weight faster’.

It turned out to be a hoax by a team of people who wanted to raise awareness of the dangers of “junk science” and the exploitation that accompanies it. Their target was the diet industry and the media.

Science journalist John Bohannon explained that he was contacted last year by a German television reporter and colleague, who were working on a documentary film about the junk-science diet industry. They wanted to reveal what they considered to be ‘corruption’ in the way that research into diet was being reported by demonstrating how easy it is to turn bad science into big headlines.

They recruited a German doctor, who had written a book criticising the pseudo-science in the diet industry, to run a clinical trial testing whether bitter chocolate could be used as a dietary supplement. Bitter chocolate was chosen because it was a favourite of ‘whole food fanatics’: “Bitter chocolate tastes bad, therefore it must be good for you. It’s like a religion.”   A financial analyst friend was asked to crunch the numbers.

Using Facebook, the team recruited volunteers, offering 150 Euros to anyone willing to go on a diet for three weeks and take part in the trial.

Fifteen volunteers were chosen and randomly divided into three groups. The first was asked to follow a low carbohydrate diet, the second was asked to follow the same diet, but to include a 42 gram bar of bitter dark chocolate each day. The third group was the control, and they were asked to make no changes at all to their normal diet.

The team used a number of ‘tricks’ to ensure the success of their project.

Firstly, they invented a name and created a website for what sounded like an influential scientific organisation to run the study – The Institute of Diet and Health.

Secondly, to gain a newsworthy outcome from the trial, they worked on the principle that if you measure a large number of factors from a very small sample, you are almost certain to get a “statistically significant” result. By ensuring that their clinical trial had an extremely small sample of 15, but measured a wide range of variables – 18 to be exact – including weight, cholesterol, sodium, blood protein, sleep quality, and general well-being, they were confident of a newsworthy finding.

As John Bohannon explained, “We didn’t know exactly what would pan out — the headline could have been that chocolate improves sleep or lowers blood pressure — but we knew our chances of getting at least one ‘statistically significant’ result were pretty good.”

Thirdly, once the research was concluded and the report was written, it was submitted to a number of journals that didn’t require peer reviews. For a payment of 600 Euros, The International Archives of Medicine published the paper.

Finally, to signal accompany the publication of the report, a press release was carefully designed to “exploit journalists’ incredible laziness”.

Thanks to “cut and paste” journalism, the research was widely reported around the world. Those media outlets that published it clearly did not look into the legitimacy of the Institute of Diet and Health, the quality of the research with its tiny sample, nor the reputation of a journal that published scientific studies without subjecting them to peer reviews. As a result, the bogus diet research was reported world-wide as fact.

The whole exercise was carefully planned to expose the prevalence of junk science and sensation driven press coverage. The team wanted to demonstrate just how easy it is for people to be conned over so-called scientific evidence, and they highlighted the need for far more scrutiny – and scepticism.

As John Bohannon explained in an interview on CBS News, “The world is just drowning in all this pseudoscience and when there is science, it’s very poorly reported. We [journalists] should be doing a better job.”

The point is that junk science and hype-driven press coverage, doesn’t just apply to the diet industry. Dubious research can be found in all sorts of areas to justify claims for political or financial advantage. But nowhere is it more evident than in the field of climate change.

French Scientists from the Paris based Société de Calcul Mathématique (SCM) have just published a White Paper report, The battle against global warming: an absurd, costly and pointless crusade. They say, “We are fighting for a cause – reducing CO2 emissions – that serves absolutely no purpose, in which we alone believe, and which we can do nothing about. You would probably have to go quite a long way back in human history to find such a mad obsession.”

Headed by Professor Bernard Beauzamy, SCM explains, “There is not a single fact, figure or observation that leads us to conclude that the world‘s climate is in any way ‘disturbed‘. It is variable, as it has always been, but rather less so now than during certain periods or geological eras. Rising sea levels are a normal phenomenon linked to upthrust buoyancy; they are nothing to do with so-called global warming. As for extreme weather events – they are no more frequent now than they have been in the past.”

They ask, “Do human beings have the technological ability to change the climate? The answer is no: human beings can do nothing about solar activity, the state of the oceans, the temperature of the Earth‘s magma, or the composition of the atmosphere.”

And they are scathing about the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – the world’s oracle on global warming – explaining that if one of their reports was submitted for publication in a reputable scientific journal, it would be rejected: “The IPCC report is totally flawed in terms of basic scientific method, since it ignores the natural variations in the variables that it seeks to analyze: temperature, precipitation, CO2 concentration, etc. The IPCC argues as if the globe were in a constant, steady state that is disturbed only by human activities. The IPCC report is equally flawed in terms of data acquisition, since in principle it chooses the data or datasets that support its theses and discards all the rest, which are simply ignored. The IPCC report is highly ideologically biased. It does not follow any of the basic rules of scientific research and could certainly not be published in a peer-reviewed journal.”

The reality is that climate change has become totally politicised, with computer model predictions of catastrophic environmental collapse being used to gain press coverage and scare the population.

In spite of such forecasts being false, the movement marches on, personally denigrating anyone who questions their integrity, labelling them as “climate deniers” and threatening their employment – as Philippe Verdier, the chief weather forecaster at France’s state television network, found out earlier this month, when he was taken off air for publishing a book attacking the global warming juggernaut. His book, Climate Investigation, criticises climatologists and political leaders for taking the world hostage with their misleading data: “We are hostage to a planetary scandal over climate change – a war machine whose aim is to keep us in fear.”

He explained, “I received a letter telling me not to come. I’m in shock. This is a direct extension of what I say in my book, namely that any contrary views must be eliminated.”

He believes top climate scientists, who rely on state funding, have been “manipulated and politicised”, and he is scathing about the IPCC, questioning the accuracy of their climate models, claiming that they “blatantly erased” contradictory data.

Mr Verdier decided to write his book in June 2014 when the French foreign minister summoned the country’s main weather presenters and urged them to mention “climate chaos” in their forecasts – ahead of the UN’s crucial climate change Conference of Parties (COP), to be hosted in Paris in December 2015. After the politician appeared on the front cover of a magazine posing as a weatherman with the headline: “500 days to save the planet”, he decided that it was time for a real weatherman to express his opinions – “What’s shameful is this pressure placed on us to say that if we don’t hurry, it’ll be the apocalypse.”

The book was released at a particularly sensitive time for the French Government, which is expecting some 50,000 global warming advocates from around the world to converge on Paris next month – burning copious quantities of fossil fuels as they gather to set new rules restricting the use of fossil fuels.

Organisers of COP21 want a legally binding universal agreement to keep global warming below 2°C.

However, deep divisions remain between parties.

The European Union has pledged to cut CO2 emissions by 40 percent below the 1990 level by 2030 – but only if the agreement is legally binding on all countries.

Developing nations insist that the burden for cutting greenhouse gases should fall on developed countries, which they claim caused the problem. China and India, along with their 24-member bloc of ‘Like-Minded Developing Countries’, are adamant that developing nations should not only be exempt from any restrictions, but should also be compensated! They are demanding a legally binding compensation package of $100 billion per year from 2020 from developed nations including New Zealand.

The reality is that climate change is now being used to not only engineer control of the economic progress of nations, but to also redistribute their wealth. But what is especially bizarre is that this is all happening in spite of the fact that there has been no appreciable rise in average global surface temperatures for nearly 20 years!

This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator is ecologist and Greenpeace founder, Dr Patrick Moore, who left the organisation when it turned away from science to embrace “sensationalism, misinformation, anti-humanism and fear”. In a lecture outlining the crucial importance of carbon dioxide to mankind, Dr Moore states that it’s time we all challenged global warming propaganda:

“CO2 is the most important building block for all life on Earth. All life is carbon-based, including our own. Surely the carbon cycle and its central role in the creation of life should be taught to our children – rather than the demonization of CO2, that ‘carbon’ is a ‘pollutant’ that threatens the continuation of life. We know for a fact that CO2 is essential for life and that it must be at a certain level in the atmosphere for the survival of plants, which are the primary food for all the other species alive today. Should we not encourage our citizens, students, teachers, politicians, scientists, and other leaders to celebrate CO2 as the giver of life that it is?

“It is a proven fact that plants, including trees and all our food crops, are capable of growing much faster at higher levels of CO2 than present in the atmosphere today. Even at the today’s concentration of 400 parts per million plants are relatively starved for nutrition. The optimum level of CO2 for plant growth is about 5 times higher, 2000 ppm, yet the alarmists warn it is already too high. They must be challenged every day by every person who knows the truth in this matter. CO2 is the giver of life and we should celebrate CO2 rather than denigrate it as is the fashion today.”

The reality is that there will always be some who will try to exploit public fear and gullibility – whether over chocolate, global warming, or some other issue. But as Dr Moore contends, it’s beholden on us all to not only challenge those seeking advantage, but to also demand that the use of pseudo-science to further a cause is subjected to proper scrutiny before being reported as the truth in the media.



Should New Zealand pay global warming compensation to developing countries?

Vote x 120

 *Poll comments are posted below.


*All NZCPR poll results can be seen in the Archive.

Click to view x 120


There is no way that any country should pay money to combat climate chang. Climate chang is a natural phenomena and cannot be changed by paying a dollar to a greenie or any other person in this world. If we had honest newspaper reporters there would be no argument re climate. An honest , and or trustworthy reporter, and editor of the publication would report truth to the masses. Allan
I won’t suggest your commenters actually read the science, there’s too much prejudice and misunderstanding. But I will suggest you all check your sources, always: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moore_(environmentalist)#Criticism http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/about/history/Patrick-Moore-background-information/ Anna
This is just another scam to strip us of our assets.  Just more propaganda to control us. When we are left to make our own choices the country as a whole prospers. Wake up NZ. Angus
We would be idiots to do so – to, in effect, give in to political blackmail & fraud. Should we do so, we will be well under way to subjugation by “One World Government” – by the U.N. Dave
Absolute PC garbage. Dave
Absolutely not. Aphrodite
They should fix. Jim
Never. Chris
Very scepticle of scientists. Alan
Why do the powers that be continue to listen and give credence to the despoiling of the environment by humans is leading to their downfall? Is it not time we all stand up and say ENOUGH! Michael
To quote an author whose name escapes me “The world prefers one great lie to a lot of small truths” I can’t believe that the public cannot think for themselves and stop believing people who have hidden agendas. And shame on the politicians and world leaders who also display a distinct lack of leadership. John
Certainly not! Bruce
It is a load of rubbish just a normal weather pattern. Richard
What an absurd situation this is. The mind boggles at the number of well intentioned people who are in an internal termoil over the warming of the planet. Perhaps they should all go and take a cold shower, though not all at the same time lest it create (1) a surge in fossil fuel consumption and (2) a catastrophic overload of the drainage system! Peter
Absolutely not. Craig
When a volcano in Iceland can emit all the CO2 produced by man since the beginning of this century and there are many of these volcanic eruptions worldwide. Thank God for our volcanos so we can all eat. Rodney
‘ The end of the Enlightenment’ is nigh. We should celebrate Carbon Dioxide. Hopefully the benefits of CO2 per Patrick Moore, Lord Ridley & others are presented to the wowsers and liars at the December UN conference in Paris and the truth is made apparent. Monica
The planet has been able to look after itself for billions of years, and will continue to do so long after we are gone. As a general intention it makes sense to minimise pollution of any kind but there is no need to obsess about it, especially when the ‘science’ being used to increase the “fear, uncertainty and doubt” levels is so dodgy. Gary
Never, ever, ever, ever etc Clark
Not a cent. Graham
NO, especially not by the most gutless, dishonest, conniving United Nationals, as they are the ones running the biggest scam of all times, GLOBAL WARMING, Google, Agenda 2030 and go to Investigate Daily, and the UN want to be the world Government, I don’t think so. Athol
A wealth re-distribution scheme for the lazy! John
The whole Climate change debate is a fraud, perpetrated by the Socialist United Nations in an attempt to redistribute wealth from the developed nations to the under developed nations. Their constant requests for money should be answered with a polite no we are not giving any of our hard earned wealth away. In most cases the money given does not get to those in need but remains in the pockets of the corrupt despots and leaders of those countries anyway. Allan
Absolutely not! Steve
Why should we ? Look at Indonesia for example. Recently they have created massive air pollution(AGAIN) by doing their seasonal burning of enormous spaces in their forests to clear the area for farming. Now in comparison we are such a tiny contributor to global warming( and pollution) in comparison to the big boys. I smacks of just another scheme to extract money from us. The whole bloody planet has turned into a giant US of A( holes) where everybody wants to sue everybody for whatever gain there could be made under any pretext. A rather sad state of affairs indeed.Same with this TPPA where corporations are able to sue Governments for alleged loss of profits caused by policies made by individual governments. Now that is topping it all that you and I and and Joe Bloke out there on the street will be forced to pay up or else . Because at the end of the day it is us THE PEOPLE who are creating all the funds running the show and will bleed for this utter rip off scheme. Michael
GLOBAL COOLING is FACT. Human made climate influence is FICTION. Every nation should deny all Chinese Imports and exports to that burgeoning out of control populace; its all slave labour tat undermining every economy of the planet anyway and disregarding any reference to CO2 China is now a MAJOR POLLUTER with their huge garbage ‘recycling” adding to the dioxins and heavy metals into land, air and oceans and food chain. they aren’t merely taking the urine; they are liberally producing it and much worse. STOP the travesty and pseudo science. Zoran
NO! NO! NO! NO! These socioCOMMUNISTS like Uncle Helen Clark have an agenda carefully hidden from the majority of people. It’s not to help the world; it’s simply to further GLOBAL MARXISM. Apologies, but I have no desire to live in a world ruled by the “Clarks”. Proper scientific method has been applied to the global “warming” phenomenon and found the Earth is actually in a cooling phase. Hanson should be burnt at the stake as the avaricious hypocrite he is. Time for the emotional BLACKMAIL to stop. Mark
Fully agree it’s a disgrace that politicians are leading the charge, promoting the climate change nonsense. It’s high time someone had the balls to stand up and tell the truth. Shane
No, no, no. What a travesty of justice and waste of money. It would be very unlikely tha t it would be spent to help the people who need it. Hilary
No, we have enough matters to worry about at home, some countries just have to sort out their own problems, we have enough and have had to do that for ourselves in the past. I am fed up that everyone wants a piece of the pie from such a small country as NZ. Audrey
A United Nations backed scheme to enhance World Govt………I DON’T THINK SO!!!!! Neil
I say no. Willi
Should New Zealand agree to pay global warming compensation to developing countries? Not only the food industry but just about all the others, the Climate warming scenario, every branch of living bit is perverted to suit the ends of sensationalistic journalism and what is more….. IT SELLS COPY..for we devour it. As for pay anything to developing countries, well I thought the whole idea for them to develop was to do it for themselves, especially so after over 30 years since the demise of colonialism. As we have seen with our Maoris continual hand outs and hand ups are definitely not the answer. Although under our present electoral system of MMP, they are a necessary item to retain power as the Governing Party in New Zealand. The constant help and aid on settling the great exodus of world refugees, our humanitarian actions which give us all a cosy feel of doing the right thing, are in reality, the very wrong thing to do. It will cost and cause insurmountable problems for our descendants, not to mention the very obvious fact that they will have to face a very different world from our democratic way of living. These professional alarmists and fear mongers must be a God send to the United Nations; and its concept of World Government. It is long past the time when we will have to demand a higher standard of more accurate reporting instead of the present sensationalism we encounter daily in our Media. Brian
Problem 1:- The ‘developed countries’, generally the Western world, have a monetary system, that relies on borrowed money ie debt finance, to sustain itself. The U.S.A. debt is currently around $US18 trillion . N.Zs debt is many $NZ billions. Do we transfer some of this debt to the developing countries as part payment, or do we borrow even more to give them a free ride at our expense. This being after we have transfered all of our manufacturing capabilities to their shores, to provide work for their workers, at the expense of our own. Problem 2:- The entire global warming–climate change theory is a brilliant scam, invented by, socialists of the most dishonest kind & promoted by failed socialists, who now control the U N. This is a typical, ‘hate the successful’ & ‘give a free ride to those who won’t help themselves’ philosophy. Sadly the indoctrinated majority, will continue to vote Labour, or it’s National branch at the next election, thus allowing the statusquo to continue down the slippery slope towards separatism “apartheid” & promotion of false science “moral bankruptcy” Two options,{1} sit back & watch all that has been worked for & been achieved given away, or {2} Vote for those who promote one law for all, & insist on the promotion of true science.. A.G.R.
What an excellent joke. The cretins in western countries who have espoused the man-made cause of non-existent global warming (later modified to climate variation) are now to be convinced (quite easily, I expect) that developed nations caused the problem in the first place and should pay compensation to developing countries. The gods can grin at that one. Robin
No… No … and No. Is anybody in the govt listening … I dont think so. Des
Absolutely not, how come our people as so naive. Ian
No bloody way Just more lies perpetrated by vested interest . Just another tax that shonky is going to lump on us ,just like the treaty settlements. Greg
Global warming is a load of nonsense. Look at the fossil record. The climate has always been changing, and I can assure you Global warmth would be a lot easier to handle than global cooling. Which I sense is more likely to happen. Barry
They should pay us for the advances in technology that they may and do take advantage off ! Roy
Kyoto was about subsidies for nuclear power as was the ipcc which Thatcher set up to justify Nuclear power so do we want every banana republic having a nuclear program built by the most corrupt and unethical bidder? Sounds like a guaranteed disaster! Craig
No global warming is a scam another way to tax us anyone who has half a brain must see that. Peter
We are all in it for the better or worse, good or bad! Theodorus
Fill a glass with ice, place it on paper and then fill to the brim with water. If global warming is real, when the ice melts the paper will be wet. To believe man can control the weather is to believe man is greater than God. George
The IPCC is scare mongering. Keith
I wrote a letter to the Southland Times covering the main points in this article and they would not print it. John
That would be a thin end of a wedge. Brian
We don’t have the money for this. But we can always get more money from China. As we have been doing this for some time and China will own New Zealand. We are 80 billion in the red now. Robert
It is hard to know which ‘scientist’ to believe and politicians are even worse. The idea of a carbon tax seems to have been a complete failure and as for a world wide tax system for carbon, well that was never going to work. I shall continue to enjoy cycling for exercise as my contribution to carbon reduction, but I shall also continue to enjoy my classic cars. Chris
Absolutely NO NO NO! Whose pockets are we going to line with this scam? Aren’t India and China the worst offenders when it comes to so called “climate change” and all the other fabricated scams? Time to tell these planners or scammers to get lost! Carolyn
No way. For one thing it would just end up in the pockets of corrupt local elites! Barend
Give then coal fired power plants and potable water instead and they will lift themselves to 1st word status faster. Rex
No compensation for the fraud of “man made global warming”. Alan
Never in a million years. It’s like giving money to the maoris, they just squander “other peoples money” and it is NEVER enough!!! Neil
New Zealand should never agree to pay for a hoax. IF it is ever proven, all should contribute equally to the solution. Frank
On this basis we should only be paying for the last 150 years as there wasn’t any industrial revolution happening. on the other hand the developing countries are benefiting from hard earned development elsewhere and are getting that free by piggy-backing on the efforts of developed countries so should pay the same proportion. Mike
Certainly NOT. David
Utter rubbish like all the so called computer modeling that supposedly supports global warming using very questionable programming. Wally
The world is not warming. No increase in temperature for 18 years. In fact it is entering a cooling stage. John
Unequal and unfair systems like that are ridiculous. Peter
NEVER. What nonsense will ‘they’ think up next? John
This is greed personified, CO2 increase is 2ppm ,pa.total rubbish. Russell
Definitely NO! It’s redistribution of wealth by FORCE. The junk science that all climate change is man-caused (AGW/C) and that he must be controlled and regulated, is second only to the biggest global scam of all time – AGENDA 21. The two are working in conjunction with one another, are driven by the U.N. so do your own homework and help expose this conspiracy FACT that is delivering us into global slavery. Don
I think it is one big rip off. Ron
What? Pay compensation to China and India for these deceitful falsified theories? UNBELIEVABLE! It was pleasing to read Dr Moore’s article beginning- “CO2 is the most important building block for all life on Earth. All life is carbon-based, including our own. Surely the carbon cycle and its central role in the creation of life should be taught to our children – rather than the demonization of CO2, that ‘carbon’ is a ‘pollutant’ that threatens the continuation of life.” As a retired agricultural researcher, I thought how many times have I made the same statement here, almost word for word. When will they listen? Bruce
A continuing ploy by UN for world domination. Henry
WHY ????? Chasing rainbows again? Get a job! get a life Get real! Maggie
I have been following this issue for a decade or more, became a member & contributor to Climate Realist (NZ) & if you check my report on the Spanish Green Economy, 2013 on google, you will see my see views. Cyril
I don’t believe in it anyway, how could I say yes. Even then it would still be a no. Eric
They should not be compensated as the whole of the climate change carbon dioxide systems everywhere should be scrapped. Colin
Our effect on “global warming” is very minimal in comparison with the large industrial countries. If our “carbon footprint” was removed the effect would be unmeasurable. Graeme
Not at all. Paul
Outstanding article by Dr.Moore.Conclusive inarguable proof of the global warming myth. Bob Jones column as always,a pearl of wisdom. Campbell
Absolutely not. The whole global worming issue is a scam a small amount of rational thought and investigation would soon show. If anything the developing nations should be paying the developed (Western) nations for the technology that is helping them develop. Mike
It is all a big scam! The climate has always changed and always will. Carbon Dioxide is beneficial for plant growth. The news reports we get are all biased. Simon
“Global Warming” is a political game designed to create a new ‘financial investment tool’ for a few wealthy participants (eg: Carbon Credits scheme), Sadly our ex PM Helen Clarke being one of the initiators in NZ, I think by design rather than misleading ‘research’ . MervB
Absolutely not! Maybe those countries with the most active volcanoes should pay more, after all, they spew out more pollution than humans? David
Sent to my MP 29/10: Concerning 2015 Paris treaty, can you ensure that any treaty draft or treaty that is signed by New Zealand has included; ‘At any time after three years from the date on which this Protocol has entered into force for a Party, that Party may withdraw from this Protocol by giving written notification to the Depositary.’ Bob
In the 1960.s as a tomato grower in Guernsey I used CO2 not only did the plans grow faster the photosynthesis made oxygen. John
Whole theory is crock science !! Peter
But our politicians all act in their own immediate interest, therefor we are unlikely to get any sensible decisions from them. John
Why should we when it appears to me that the majority of our country has green plants whether it be lawns, shrubs, gardens, road verges, pastures, native bush, production forests to absorb a year CO2 emissions even if it were true that these emissions are bad.Just how many dollars are being collected, from which industries and being paid to where. Bryan
It is all rubbish! David
I cannot believe it has gotten this far. How did so many get sucked in? Dayal
Because global warming is a giant have and the sooner governments have regard to unbias scientific facts, the better. Keith
I believe this is one great socialist smoke screen – beware! Stuart
So costs in the developed countries increase in order to pay the compensation, and as a result production shifts to the cheaper developing countries. Global greenhouse gas emissions increase overall (because of the laxer requirements in the developing countries. You couldn’t make this stuff up. David
The biggest con of our time. David
No because global warming caused by humans is a lie. Carolyn
Never ever. Barry
American junk, money science. Ian
Unfortunately the tourism operators of New Zealand have been forced to pay fees to gain their safety audits, and these companies using the green label are part owned by the New Zealand government. Peter
I have always been sceptical of global warming. It is just another way of taxing the population. Governments and local bodies use “science” to extract money from its citizens. The Bay of Plenty Regional Council has used pseudo-science to ban open fires in homes and control the type of home heating in homes. Big Brother using its power for control. Bernie
Developing countries are not only some of the biggest contributors to CO2 (assuming it is a problem at all), but many of these countries, eg. Indonesia and Brazil, are guilty of denuding the earth of C4 plants that sequester by far the most Carbon as they destroy their rain forests. Similarly developing countries in Africa are systematically destroying grassland by un-managed grazing of too many livestock, thus removing the ability of the grasslands to sequester Carbon. Geoff
Not at all. Not when global warming developing countries continue on their merry way of ignoring what is taking place in their global sphere of influence regardless. Roy
Sit down, have a coffee. O No that is bad for you. Let us have a BBQ, no that is bad for you. No sugar, no white bread, no alcohol, No this, no that. All proven to be bad for you. All excess is bad for you. Too many scientists seem to be very bad for us. Johan
With a University science background I have always considered the IPCC and John Key’s blind acceptance (and that of his Chief Scientific Adviser/Obstetrician) of their published views to be completely unscientific and purely emotional. Graeme
Global warming is rubbish it is just another means of taxing us for there own gain There is so much scare taticts they use carbon dioxide which has no bearing what so ever on our climate which will do as it likes regardless of taxes and such like. Russell
Absolutely NOT. Global warming, or climate change, or whatever else you might want to call it .is merely a natural cyclic change. After all, how did the ice age disappear? Maurice
What global warming? Warren
This is an absolute waste of money, we’re being conned once again and it seems the powers that be spend most of their time and our tax dollars trying to figure out ways of ripping off the public purse. Have we ever had a politician that worked for the people that pay them? I doubt it very much. Stevo
A total and complete waste of money. Spend money on things that matter, schools, hosptials etc. etc. Greg
WHAT ??? Don J
Not only should New Zealand sound a warning against the myth of global warning. New Zealand should also come to its senses , discontinue to Emissions Trading Scheme and promote common sense with regard to the way we live in the world around us. Pieter
Absolutely NO! Steve
Our politicians might be daft and think the masses even more inferior BUT they wrong and try being honest for a change. Peter
Absolutely ridiculous ! Bill
No way! Laurie
Nor should we compensate those who have destroyed their protecting reef systems by fishing with dynamite! Jim
It is part of the Kazarian Zionist structure to create a distraction and then fleece you. If it wasn’t climate change it would be something else. Cap and trade a billion dollar industry for goldman sacs Robert
I have always thought global warming is an absolute con – nice to have even more proof. Thank you. Chris
No, not now not ever! Colin
Ridiculous. The climate is in constant change whatever we do to help or hinder it. Leave it alone to get on with its natural cycles. Liz
What a ridiculous proposal! Andrea
I simple do not believe in political driven unproven science. Maria
Time to stop this hot air fest in Paris. Collin
What a load of BS!!!!! Andy
Has “Global Warming” been proven beyond doubt? Is mankind responsible for what passes as global warming? I am informed that the earth has not warmed up one iota in the last 18 or so years and that we may be heading for another ice age! Kevan
No way the whole thing is a shame and is not confirmed, science is never settled. Graeme
Why even consider paying anything to anyone when so called “global warming” is in such scientific doubt????????? Andrew
Absolutely not! All evidence shows what I have always contended – Global Warming advocates are simply creating a “money-go-round” – out of the pockets of the public into the pockets of a few. Jack
It is time to expose the false climate change issue as a fraud. We have 3 years to go with no significant temperature change before the whole computer model on which the climate change epidemic started is exposed false. Tom
Like the article. Let’s see if any politicians or mainstream media grab hold of the content. Thank goodness fro Leighton Smith, 1ZB & You. Neville
So-called greenhouse gas emissions by NZ and other developed countries has not damaged the global atmosphere so there is no compensation that can be claimed by developing countries. Helen
They would love to something for nothing and we have much of that already. Ido
I am very sick of the sensationalist articles we are bombarded with. Politicians who make stupid unresearched comments should be publicly rebuked and informed as to the facts. It is about time the general public started to check out some of the garbage we are fed on climate change. Gail
It’s a load of rubbish it is just naturally occurring. Glenys
An absolute con and it will keep rolling on. Follow the money and perhaps we will see who is driving it. Tim
Anything to help our export market. John
No way! The whole global warming agenda is a huge scam! Bryan
This is getting completely out of hand. There is NO EVIDENCE at all to show that carbon dioxide causes global warming. When will the media, the politicians and the public wake up? Casey
I cannot believe it has got to this point. People must have rocks in their heads. Peter
No, NZ should not be a part of any binding agreement. National should pull out of any such deal and take the political repercussions on the chin. The thinking public would support them and slowly but surely the truth would come out that this has been the greatest con job in history. Mike
Paying climate compensation is the most stupid idea I’ve heard in a long time. Andrew