Here's one his cohorts:

William Kininmonth is an Australian climate change skeptic. His only listed qualification is "Director of the Australasian Climate Research Institute" [1], but the Institute is listed as simply a trading name for "Kininmonth, William Robert", and is based at his private residence in Kew, Australia. [2]. It has no website, phone number or existence separate from Kininmonth.

In a letter to to The Age newspaper, Kininmonth wrote that "Greenhouse gases emit more radiation than they absorb and their direct impact is to cool the atmosphere.  

OMG!!!!!!!!!!! It's difficult to find good help these days.

Yes, this thread is quite hilarious Skippy.

William Kininmonth is an Australian meteorologist noted for his views as an opponent of global warming theory and frequently writes on the topic of climate change. He believes that the warming trend of the recent century is not unusual, and he is critical of the simple model of climate systems represented by the IPCC. While Kininmonth believes that anthropogenic sources may make a small contribution to global warming, he believes the natural variability far exceeds that contribution, and this poses serious hazards for human kind.

Kininmonth headed Australia's National Climate Centre from 1986 to 1998[citation needed], with responsibilities for monitoring Australia's changing climate and advising the Australian government on the extent and severity of climate extremes. He was Australia's delegate to the WMO Commission for Climatology, was a member of Australia's delegations to the Second World Climate Conference (1990) and the subsequent intergovernmental negotiations for the Framework Convention on Climate Change (1991-1992).

Well keep it coming your omissions and hypocrisy knows no bounds it seems.

Grendel wrote on May 27^th, 2009 at 3:19pm:


Grendel - once again - learn the basics. They are not that difficult. Standard high school stuff.  Come back when you understand what a ludicrous statement this is :

ROTFLMAO

just how thick are you?

Every argument you toss up i throw back in your face.

You say someone without any qualifications makes a dumb or wrong statement.  gee really.  I toss dumbo unqualified Gore (who is waaaaay less qualified than Kinnimonth actually)  back at you for making many statements all of which can be sourced and contextualised and you pretend I never did it.

ROTFLMAO at your ignorance and hypocrisy.

Grendel wrote on May 27^th, 2009 at 3:29pm:


Gore is basically a communicator. He is quoting from the research conducted by others in full consulation with them.

Oh right those film-makers are really all research scientists.
(BTW Gore read a script)

Your rules state that no-one who is not a climate scientist is allowed to make comments.  Oh hypocrite.

Gore has been your best weapon at propaganda delivery and scaremongering and he's making a motza out of it...  just another point you ignore and are totally hypocritical about.

Oh wait...  b4 I forget

http://www.climatedepot.com/a/611/UN-IPCC-Scientist-No-convincing-scientific-arguments-to-support-claim-that-increases-in-greenhouse-gases-are-harmful-to-the-climate

I have reluctantly concluded, after detailed study of the evidence presented by the IPCC, that there are no convincing scientific arguments to support the claim that increases in greenhouse gases are harmful to the climate. [...]

The IPCC “central/benchmark projections” are based on a combination pf ridiculously oversimplified models and unrealistic futures scenarios. The projections themselves conflict with the current fall in global temperatures, the absence of any warming in New Zealand, and the lack of local evidence of sea level change. [...]