Obama’s Australian Bloopers More Exposed

The backlash to Obama’s address at Queensland University has increased, with today’s Australian running three articles (see below) that further damage his credibility both as an ally and a world leader. To date Obama’s behaviour in Australia seems to have received little public attention in the US, although today’s weekly letter from the Science and Environment Policy Project in Washington includes a number of references to critical articles published here. That will spread.

At the Australian end, there is nothing in the Fairfax press and no critical comment or questioning of Obama on the ABC. Importantly, however, the Abbott government  now has a second minister (Andrew Robb) censuring Obama and doing so to a greater extent than Bishop did over the week-end. Robb told a TV interviewer on Sky News that he believed Obama was “not informed”. In fact, he was informed but chose to ignore the information.

Analysis by Henry Ergas below also points out that Obama was deceptive in pretending that his promise of $US3 bn for a Green Climate Fund was new money when it actually involved no more than shifting money already promisedto the World Bank. Ergas describes Obama as being “both petty and grandiloquent”. Note also that Ergas suggests that India is likely to considerably increase imports of coal from Australia.

Finally, The Australian has published an article (see below We need more carbon dioxide, not less) by the former leader of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, who (thanks mostly to Case Smit) recently toured Australia. Moore argues that the Earth needs a lot more carbon dioxide than it presently has. A level of about 1500 parts per million would see an improved life for humans, animals and plants. This is much higher than present levels of around 400 parts per million which warmists portray as close to the maximum. Moore provides an historical perspective that effectively says that there is no dangerous warming threat in the foreseeable future.

I have previously suggested that Moore might be asked by Abbott to compile a review of the basis of existing policies designed to reduce the usage of fossil fuels. This article by a US sceptic illustrates the absurdity of the US spending $US22 billion a year on such policies.

Leave a Reply