February 5, 2008

by Ron Ewart, President


Seattle/Issaquah, WA




It is High Time a Joint United States-Canadian Commission

on Global Warming Be Formed Now, Before Real Damage is Done

to Both of Our Economies by Unwarranted and Unnecessary

CO2 Limiting Legislation!

(See below for a large collection of supporting references and related links)



Many groups and individuals in the United States and Canada have listened with alarm and disbelief to plans of both governments to saddle their people and industries with the burdens of carbon emission restrictions, carbon taxes and the risks of carbon trading, which is an open invitation to massive fraud.


The science of global warming is definitely not settled. Thousands of qualified independent scientists around the world now question whether sufficient attention has been paid to the proven historical influence of natural solar cycles, the significance of water vapor contributions and many other aspects of climate science.  Since the scientific investigations for the UN IPCC fourth assessment report were completed 18 months ago, new research and new observations have cast serious doubt on many of the IPCCís conclusions.


It is generally agreed that if greenhouse warming was occurring, the strongest warming would be in the upper atmosphere above the tropics.  Recent research shows this is not occurring, which indicates that the "warming" is not being caused by greenhouse gases:  [Douglass, D.H., J.R. Christy, B.D. Pearson, and S.F. Singer. 2007. A comparison of tropical temperature trends with model predictions. International Journal of Climatology, DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651.]


Everyone, from the highest government official to the lowliest taxpaying consumer, must realize that unless it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt that carbon dioxide causes excessive global warming, there is no justification for imposing restrictions and costs on emitters of carbon dioxide. These burdens will pass inevitably on to the whole community and will fall most heavily on those who can least afford them and worse, once again, constitutional property rights will be under attack by another national and international environmentalist-generated crisis.


No valid, verifiable scientific proof has yet been established for man-caused global warming.  All we have are hypotheses and speculations based on computer models.  Governments have a duty, nay an absolute obligation, to create an opportunity for the full range of scientific evidence to be examined and evaluated.  Any actions or policies instituted must not be solely political.  This can best be done by establishing a joint United States-Canadian Commission on Global Warming.  The new commission must not take on the flavor of the Bali conference, which purposely excluded opposing points of view. 


Many fear the enormous costs of taxing and decimating our economy and subsidizing expensive and ineffective alternate energy proposals. The very high cost to society of the actions being proposed require that we settle the science before forcing our two countries into a futile and expensive exercise to solve a problem that may not exist. "Doing it just in case" is not an option.


Federal and state governments need to vigorously look into the likely long-term costs and effects of various legislative proposals for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. However, a parallel independent inquiry is needed into the science to determine whether any action is required at all, especially in light of the fact that whatever our two countries do will be undone by China and India.  So the proposed legislative solutions will be anything but global and the citizens of our two countries will end up bearing the entire cost for much less than even a partial solution, to their own detriment, while other heavy CO2 emitters skate by scot-free.


The United States and Canada are both heavily dependent on primary production and world trade.   The entire northern hemisphere could be very damaged by the global warming extremism of Al Gore and Old Europe.  Al Gore is more motivated by extreme Green politics than scientific truth, while Old Europe believes that their nuclear capacity protects them from the carbon costs they plan to impose on others.  Europe also has adopted the highly controversial "precautionary principle" (see: which essentially says "DO IT, no matter what the cost, even if there is no science to support it, just in case, or as a PRECAUTION".


Thousands of scientists believe that CO2 in the atmosphere is a benefit, not a threat to mankind, and there is no need to launch a massive assault on our lifestyle, industry and prosperity to solve a non problem.  Further, water vapor has the greatest effect on global warming (95%), where CO2 contributes a fraction of 1% to global warming.  The following graph shows this relationship with absolute clarity.


(If your browser does not display the following image, it is attached as a JPEG file)

One can readily see that 95% of the greenhouse gas effect is caused by water vapor.


We make three (3) recommendations to the formation of a joint US-Canada, G-W Commission:


1.   That the United States and Canadian governments commission a joint public inquiry to investigate and report on the science underlying the claims that man-made CO2 causes dangerous global warming. This inquiry must consider whether it is likely that human activity has had a significant effect on global warming and the extent to which the policies being proposed to cut manís greenhouse gas emissions are likely to affect global warming, or any other aspects of climate.   All current, independent science must be allowed into the inquiry but the UN IPCC report is to be excluded.  It is generally understood that the international environmental movement has taken on a character of its own in promoting and propagandizing man-caused global warming for its own agenda.  It is therefore strongly recommended that the commission have only a very small percentage of environmentally-credentialed participants in the commission.


2.   That the inquiry shall first analyze all current global warming science, then determine if further study is necessary.   If such new science is required, that the commission shall have the power and funding to initiate wide ranging scientific inquiries into all aspects of present knowledge on climate and to take and consider evidence on climate change and to analyze the likely effects (a full cost/benefit analysis) of currently proposed policies on reducing carbon emissions.


3.   That until such an inquiry from the joint commission has been fully investigated and reported, no steps are to be taken to institute carbon taxes, exchanges, trading, or emissions monitoring or reduction programs of any kind or nature, in either country. 


Again, there is growing concern among the world scientific community about the conclusions being promoted by the IPCC.   In contrast to the 2000 or so scientists who are claimed to have contributed to the IPCC (many of whom do not support the extremist political conclusions promoted by the IPCC) there are at least 20,000 scientists who have signed their names in public opposition to the IPCC.


In addition, many organizations, think tanks and business leaders have voiced opposition to the radical proposals from the IPCC, and many more are quietly dismayed. There is no consensus about the science, even if scientific questions could be decided by a show of hands.  Scientific questions are determined by facts and evidence, and this is what a joint United States-Canadian Commission can discover and make public before we enter into policies that will hurt both of our countries, while other emitting countries do virtually nothing.


Why is the National Association of Rural Landowners concerning itself with so-called, man-caused global warming policies?  Primarily because most environmental regulation falls disproportionately on rural landowners, throughout the world.  Even though carbon emission restrictions would fall mostly on carbon emitters in urban areas, some aspects of those restrictions will fall on rural landowners, due to some policies that could severely restrict or limit the right of use and development of private lands, in order to increase the carbon (CO2) absorption in non-urban areas.  It is the full and dedicated attempt of national and international socialists and environmentalists to render national sovereignty, constitutional principles and property rights null and void, in pursuit of their UN-European driven radical social and environmental agenda.  They must be stopped before they succeed.


Our February 2008 NARLO Newsletter was devoted entirely to the global warming issue and we have attached that Newsletter as additional information to this debate. 


Finally, we wish to acknowledge and offer our sincere thanks to: Mr. Viv Forbes, BScApp, FAusIMM, FSIA, Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition, MS 23, Rosewood Qld 0754 640 533. 

Website E-mail:


for his excellent research and contribution to this information.  You will find a large list of additional references and links on global warming below our organization and signature block. 


Please forward this message to your lists, if you deem it appropriate.





Ron Ewart, President


P. O. Box 1031, Issaquah, WA  98027

425 222-4742 or 1 800 682-7848

(Fax No. 425 222-4743)







Related Articles

 Global Warming Replaces 9/11 As Justification To Do Anything (Mar. 13, 2007)

Global Warming 'Consensus' Is Unanimous: Gore Lies (Mar. 13, 2007)

Gore and The Great Luddite Hoax of 2007 By Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.(Mar. 9, 2007)

Al Gore's 'Scientific' Media Study Isn't Scientific (Mar. 2, 2007)

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says (Feb. 28, 2007)

Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth One-sided, Misleading, Exaggerated, Speculative, Wrong (Feb. 28, 2007)

Global Warmers Getting Desperate By E. Ralph Hostetter (Feb. 26, 2007)

Who's Lying? A Simple Tale Of Unbiased Global Warming Facts (Feb. 24, 2007)

The Fraud of Global Warming: True CO2 Record Buriend Under Gore (Feb. 24, 2007)

Global Warming In A Climate Of Ignorance (Feb. 21, 2007)

Climatology Ph.D Says Global Warming "Doesn't Exist" (Feb. 16, 2007)

The Creeping Fascism of Global Warming Hysteria by Paul J. Watson (Feb 16, 2007)

Global Warming Propagandists Targeting Skeptics & Dissenters (Feb. 13, 2007)

Global Warming Refuted ( Feb. 13, 2007)

Independent Summary Shows New UN Climate Change Report Refutes Alarmism; Reveals Major Uncertainties of the Science (Feb. 5, 2007)

Global Warming: A Paper Tiger by Vlado Bevc (Jan. 27, 2007)

An Inconvenient Truth? Al Gore Canít Give Junk Science Away (Nov. 26, 2006)

Climate Chaos? Don't Believe it! (U.K. Sunday Telegraph Nov. 5, 2006)

Global Warming and Hurricanes: Still No Connection (Sep. 16, 2005)

Storm frenzy is not an anomaly, but a phase (Sep. 13, 2005)

Hurricane Activity Varies All the Time (June 8, 2005)

Meteorologist Likens Fear of Global Warming to 'Religious Belief' (Dec. 2, 2004)

John McCain's 'Global Warming' Hearings Blasted by Climatologist (Nov. 19, 2004)

Environmentalists Blame East Coast Hurricane on 'Global Warming' (Sept. 18, 2003)

'Bring It on,' Climatologist Says of Global Warming Litigation (July 21, 2003)

'Alarmist' Global Warming Claims Unfounded Says Climatologist (July 14, 2003)

Global warming: Lies, lies, damnable lies! (Mar. 19, 2001)

Debunking Global Warming Propaganda, Steven Milloy, Publiisher


Global Warming and Climate Change, Where do you stand?

An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change
February 11, 2007

Russian academic says CO2 not to blame for global warming


Global warming: Lies, lies, damnable lies!