Follow-up Request related to Climate Change

This is a follow-up request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act in relation to the manner in which Mr. James
Snowdone's received a whitewash reply from a Customer Contact Unit
person by the name of Lucy Mundy.

The response obtained from Ms. Mundy did not answer the original
question. The original question related to Global Cooling, whereas
Ms. Mundy's response implied that Climate Change amounted to Global
Warming.

The original question did not ask what Defra's repose was to Global
Warming. It asked "How the British would not be adversely affected
by Global Cooling" (once the Global Warming scam became public
knowledge).

It is a provable fact that the writers of the IPCC Report were
'guided' to their conclusions. "That the facts were fixed around
the policy" (to quote the Downing Street Memos). This is proved and
exposed by the NIPCC Report, in which genuine scientists,
dispassionately taking into account all the available data, predict
Global Cooling as the end result. They further predict that human
intervention has no effect on climate, this being the sole
prerogative of the Sun. For further details on this aspect I
reference Mr. Paul V Sheridan's excellent article that appeared in
the Ithaca Journal of Cornell University, NY:

http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbc...

So the specific information request I wish to ask is this.

Why, Ms. Mundy, did you fail to mention any of this information,
including the fact that one of the leading members of the IPCC
recently admitted that Global Cooling is what is actually taking
place?

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/sto...

Yours faithfully,

Ms. Veronica Chapman

Dear Sir or Madam,

Further questions related to Climate Change. Under the Freedom of
Information Act I wish to know whether or not these arguments have
been fully considered by those proposing the Climate Change Bill,
and whether or not they have been incorporated. Or, if they have
been rejected, the reasons for such rejection.

(1) Carbon Dioxide is a so-called Greenhouse Gas. So is Water
Vapour (i.e. clouds). Anyone who has been outside on a sunny but
slightly clouded day fully understands the immediate drop in
temperature as a cloud temporarily blocks out the Sun. Carbon
Dioxide has exactly the same effect, in other words it prevents
energy from reaching the surface of the Earth. In this respect its
effect is that of COOLING.

(2) The Earth reflects energy received from the Sun. So-called
Greenhouse Gases 'trap' that reflected energy, and bounce it back -
Earthwards. But this bounced-back energy is nothing more than that
which was received in the first place. So it does not add to the
sum total the Earth receives (Newton's Law of Energy Conservation).
But, in order to be a part of the originally reflected energy, it
would have taken no part in heating the Earth, when first received.
When subsequently received, it will get a second chance to heat the
Earth. And may very well do so. In this respect its effect is that
of WARMING.

Nevertheless, (1) taken together with (2) is likely to result in
overall temperature STABILITY. Not, therefore, causing any overall
Climate Change at all. And the data measurements that have been
taken by genuine scientists (i.e. not those whose job it was to
'fix the facts around the policy') support this contention.

And, furthermore, there is an overall benefit to Carbon Dioxide. It
is 'breathed' by plant life, and converted into Oxygen, which then
supports all animal life. Bearing in mind the mutilation of the
Rain Forests, it could readily be argued that we need more Carbon
Dioxide in order to stimulate more growth in whatever plant life we
have left.

And that this is necessary in order to replenish the well-known
overall Oxygen deficiency, to which we are all subject.

Have these aspects been considered? If not, then why not (since
they are very simple arguments, which demand the minimal of
scientific knowledge, just the application of plain commonsense)?
This being the case, what is the purpose of the Climate Change
Bill?

Yours sincerely,

Dear Sir or Madam,

I'm overdue a response.

Has Defra taken into account that genuine scientists (i.e. those
who have access to the data, but do not have special interests such
as the IPCC Panel) have calculated that the climate change we are
experiencing is getting COOLER?

Due entirely to the lower activity of the Sun?

Is this *reality* (which can be gained anyway by simply noticing
the temperatures we have experienced over the last few years) being
taken into account by the Climate Change Bill?

The fact that the climate change we are experiencing is well within
the limits that our planet has experienced in the past? (And I do
mean *well* within. To the point of being insignificant)

Yours sincerely,

Veronica Chapman

Dear Christopher Conder,

Thank you for your response.

You have made a string of assertions without any sourced referenced
whatsoever.

Are you a Climate Scientist ir someone with similar qualifications?

If not, on what basis do you make these (otherwise unsupported)
assertions ... which (fundamentally) call ...

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=...

... and - at the last count - about 1,500 other Climate Scientists,
liars?

Yours sincerely,