Open Letter to the Prime Minister of New Zealand, by Peter J. Morgan: “It is no longer possible for any credible argument to be made that ‘the science is settled'”

Below is an Open Letter to the Prime Minister of NEW ZEALAND, the Minister of Climate Change, the Vice Chancellors of NZ’s 8 universities, and John Morgan, the Chief Executive of the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA).

It is written by Peter J. Morgan B.E. (Mech.), Dip Teaching
Honorary Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Environomics (NZ) Trust

The letter begins:

Dr Patrick Frank is a vastly experienced physical methods experimental chemist at the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford University. (SLAC is an acronym for the original name of the laboratory, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.)

Like me, for at least 30 years Dr Frank in his spare time has pursued an interest in the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming, since morphed to the meaningless euphemism “Climate Change” – the climate, like the weather, changes continually.

In his Op Ed entitled “A Climate of Closet Monsters”, Dr Frank wrote:

“My work involves experiment, measurement, and theory. As in all of science, the struggle in such work is accuracy. How accurate are the measurements? How accurate is the physical description provided by the theory? Knowledge comes only with accuracy.

In 2001 I decided to investigate the claims about CO2 emissions and climate. I simply wanted to know whether the alarm was justified. So, I studied. By 2003, I knew the alarm was not justified.

The reason is this: The entire confidence that human CO2 emissions cause the climate to warm depends upon the accuracy of climate models. Climate models are an expression of the physical theory of climate. They are currently the only source of information that can tell us how the climate might react to human CO2 emissions.

What I discovered is that if the climate models are magnifying lenses, then using them to see the effect of CO2 on the climate is like trying to see atoms using a jeweler’s loupe.

In early September 2019, my study of climate models passed peer review and was published in the Atmospheric Sciences section of Frontiers in Earth Science. It answers the questions: how reliable are the climate models, and; how much credit should we give to their predictions of a hot CO2-driven future? The answers are: they are not reliable, and no credit.”

I now inform you all that on 2 June 2021, Dr Patrick Frank, in compliance with the IPCC’s own Error Reporting protocol, made a notification to the IPCC.

Here is an extract:

“In my journey of six years to publication, through nine journal submissions, 30 reviewers and their 35 reviews, I did not encounter a single climate modeler who understood physical error analysis, or propagation of error, or the meaning of model calibration or of uncertainty, or of the impact of physical error upon predictive reliability, or even of the absolutely central distinction between accuracy and precision.

Climate modelers are evidently incapable of evaluating the reliability of their own models. This finding provides an explanation for the universal recourse to a useless precision metric to purport projection reliability in their published work, rather than accuracy.

I mention these difficulties because, in evaluating the error that I have here drawn formally to your attention, you will need to consult competent experimental physicists, who do understand physical error analysis, rather than climatologists, who do not so understand.

To reiterate: none of the published air temperature projections, neither in the primary peer-reviewed literature, nor in any of the IPCC Assessment Reports, has any scientific meaning or predictive value whatsoever. No rational policy decisions may be taken on the basis of those projections.

All general-circulation models, whatever other uses they may have, are entirely unsuitable for making projections of anthropogenic global warming. They cannot tell us anything at all about how atmospheric temperatures may evolve in the future, nor explain temperature excursions of the past.

GCMs, in themselves, cannot detect, cannot attribute, and cannot project the impact of CO2 emissions on global mean surface temperatures; neither in the present nor into the 21st century.

The uncertainty propagated through simulation time-steps generates altogether too large an uncertainty envelope for the reliable projection of future warming on any timescale. The models cannot say anything about atmospheric temperature.

Global-warming projections of climate models then, are formally demonstrated to be no better than guesswork. Those projections, which provide the entire case for concern about our influence on the climate are, to put it bluntly, utterly unreliable.

They cannot provide any reliable information on whether the climate will warm or cool. For that purpose, you might as well consult the Oracle at Delphi as any or all of the general circulation climate models.”

Surprise, surprise, the IPCC has so far failed to comply with its own Error Reporting protocol and has simply ignored Dr Frank.

Prescribed in the IPCC’s Error Reporting Protocol is a three-month period in which the IPCC must respond and correct any errors that it cannot refute. Therefore, on 3 September 2021, if neither the IPCC nor any of you has been able to provide a valid scientific refutation of the paper that Dr Patrick Frank submitted to the IPCC with his notification of 2 June 2021, the Trust will publicly call upon each and every one of you to be faithful to the long-established convention of science that a paper that cannot be refuted automatically becomes the new “truth”. Should the IPCC not be able to refute Dr Frank’s paper in compliance with the IPCC’s own Error Reporting Protocol, Prime Minister Ardern must immediately withdraw New Zealand from the IPCC and announce that fact to the nation – and indeed the world. Further, Prime Minister Ardern must immediately announce to the nation – and indeed the world – that it has been proven to the IPCC that there is no climate emergency and that as soon as possible all NZ laws and regulations pertaining to “climate change” and “climate emergency” will be repealed.

Dr Frank is no longer alone in notifying the IPCC that its models have very serious errors.

Earlier this month, Viscount Monckton of Brenchley also notified the IPCC, in accordance with its own Error Reporting Protocol, of a very serious fundamental error in climate modellers’ application of a branch of engineering and physics – namely Control Systems Theory – to the computer models used to make the climate projections upon which all of the IPCC’s Assessment Reports rely. You are all aware of this error, as I have sent you several letters on the work of Viscount Monckton and his team, known as the Argonauts. To your discredit, for all intents and purposes you have all ignored those letters.

About a year ago, Viscount Monckton had notified the IPCC of the Argonauts’ findings, but the IPCC had simply ignored him. This time, he has fully complied with the IPCC’s Error Reporting Protocol. The IPCC now has nowhere to hide, and neither do any of you.

As well as Dr Frank and the Argonauts, there are several other eminent scientists who have written papers explaining serious errors in the climate models relied upon by the IPCC. For your information, more on their work will follow. I shall be encouraging the other scientists to follow the Error Reporting Protocol.

It is no longer possible for any credible argument to be made that “the science is settled”.

When is each one of you going to have your Galileo moment, realise that you are on a hiding to nothing, and concede that you have been duped?

It is now to be hoped that each one of you understands just how serious this matter is. Perhaps you might also begin to understand just why the IPCC climate models’ projections of future global mean temperatures have proven to be so wildly inaccurate and have so far cost the world many trillions of dollars, all to zero effect – in other words, trillions of dollars have been wasted. Just imagine what could have been achieved had those trillions of dollars instead been spent on reducing chemical and plastic pollution of the environment, particularly our planet’s oceans, and also on eradicating poverty in Africa by helping to build modern coal-fired power stations to provide reliable electricity.


Peter J. Morgan B.E. (Mech.), Dip Teaching
Honorary Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Environomics (NZ) Trust

Social Media channels are restricting Electroverse’s reach: Twitter are purging followers while Facebook are labeling posts as “false” and have slapped-on crippling page restrictions.

So, be sure to subscribe to receive new post notifications by email (the box is located in the sidebar >>> or scroll down if on mobile).

Please also consider disabling ad blockers for, if you use one.

And/or become a Patron, by clicking here:

The site receives ZERO funding, and never has.

So any way you can, help us spread the message so others can survive and thrive in the coming times.

Grand Solar Minimum + Pole Shift

Related posts

19 Thoughts to “Open Letter to the Prime Minister of New Zealand, by Peter J. Morgan: “It is no longer possible for any credible argument to be made that ‘the science is settled'””

  1. Robert Campbell

    A very good letter, but they will contrive to ignore him.

    1. LocoLogos

      A very good letter, but they will contrive to ignore him… because in all that word salad [besides ignoring the main depopulation CO2 Big Lie psyop/agenda] it is never pointed out [or makes simple] that CO2 the main ESSENTIAL TRACE GAS of life that makes up only one part in twenty-five hundred (1:2500) of our atmosphere and because it’s heavier than air it mostly hangings around dissolved in ocean water and near ground level (mostly within 6″ inches deep/above GL) with the plants who need it to enable all life on earth to exist and that its current concentration is very near its historic low and has previously been as much as nearly twenty times higher when plants grew up to the sky and many of the animals were two to ten times larger as well. [besides ignoring the current main depopulation/dumbing down agendas (for The Big Lie) of wanting to have CO2 in high concentrations in children’s and adult’s face masks and crush humanity economically/physically]

  2. Willem Jan Goossen

    Have faith, all big rock slides, start with a small pebble coming lose, then a few more and more and bigger, and at the end the whole mountainside is coming down. We ale only seeing the first few pebbles and are moving to a safe spot, the rest who are ignoring the truht/pebbles will be buried in the future

    1. P. J. Flanders

      If global warming were the only arrow in their quiver, you would be perfectly correct.
      Unfortunately, most of us will be the victims of genocide before that mountainside comes down.

    2. Matt Dalby

      I hope your right, because I’m not how how long we have left to save western society from the net zero madness as well as any other darker motives such as totalitarian control of entire populations.

  3. Earth started natural cooling circa 2020. Told you so, 19 years ago.
    Global warming alarmism is a 50-year-old fraud – wolves stampeding the sheep.
    Regards, Allan

    In 2002, co-authors Dr Sallie Baliunas, Astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian, Dr Tim Patterson, Paleoclimatologist, Carleton U, Ottawa and Allan MacRae, P.Eng. (now retired), McGill, Queens, U of Alberta, published:
    1. “Climate science does not support the theory of catastrophic human-made global warming – the alleged warming crisis does not exist.”
    2. “The ultimate agenda of pro-Kyoto advocates is to eliminate fossil fuels, but this would result in a catastrophic shortfall in global energy supply – the wasteful, inefficient energy solutions proposed by Kyoto advocates simply cannot replace fossil fuels.”

    Allan MacRae published in the Calgary Herald on September 1, 2002, based on communication with Dr Tim Patterson:
    3. “If [as we believe] solar activity is the main driver of surface temperature rather than CO2, we should begin the next cooling period by 2020 to 2030.”

    MacRae updated his global cooling prediction in 2013, based on cold events that occurred starting circa 2008 near the end of Solar Cycle 23:
    3a. “I suggest global cooling starts by 2020 or sooner. Bundle up.”
    See for hundreds of extreme-cold events worldwide.
    By Allan M.R. MacRae and Joseph D’Aleo, October 27, 2019

  4. The 50-year-old climate fraud and the recent Covid-19 lockdown fraud are unscientific falsehoods, scams concocted by wolves to stampede the sheep – for political and financial gain.
    A Climate, Energy and Covid Primer for Politicians and Media
    By Allan M.R. MacRae, Published March 21, 2021, Update 1e published May 8, 2021
    Rode and Fischbeck, professor of Social & Decision Sciences and Engineering & Public Policy, collected 79 predictions of climate-caused apocalypse going back to the first Earth Day in 1970. With the passage of time, many of these forecasts have since expired; the dates have come and gone uneventfully. In fact, 48 (61%) of the predictions have already expired as of the end of 2020.

    Climate doomsters have a perfect NEGATIVE predictive track record – every very-scary climate prediction, of the ~80 they have made since 1970, has FAILED TO HAPPEN.
    Fully 48 of these predictions expired at the end of 2020. Never happened! Never will!
    What are the odds at 50:50 per prediction? 3.6*10^-15 = 0.0000000000000036 That is one in 281 Trillion!
    There is a powerful logic that says no rational person or group could be this wrong, this utterly obtuse, for this long; they followed a corrupt agenda, and they lied again and again.
    The ability to predict is the best objective means of assessing scientific competence, and the global warming alarmists have NO predictive track record – they have been 100% wrong about everything and nobody should believe these fraudsters – about anything!

  5. Anonymous

    Thge empire strikes back!

  6. climate sect + corona sect = death of humanity

    1. Corrrect – so what do you do?

      You fight!

      Never give up! Never give up! Never give up!
      – Sir Winston Churchill

      1. P. J. Flanders

        Amen, brother!

  7. P. J. Flanders

    Scientists are so sadly out of touch with the real world. The enemies of mankind have used these climate fraud years to consolidate their power. They own the media. They own, through corruption or intimidation, the top politicians in every country.
    The enemies of mankind have gone on to infect us with a manmade disease, a man-killing vaccine, and who knows what’s next.
    I recently spoke to a womn whose husband used to work for FEMA who told her of caskets and guillotines being stored in FEMA camps in the US.
    I appreciate that the effort must be made, but it will have as much effect as using a flyswatter on a grizzly bear.

  8. Ross Macleod

    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and
    hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series
    of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

  9. P. J. Flanders

    Fighting the global warming scam is fighting yesterday’s war.

    Here’s where today’s war is:

  10. hyden

    Just like the other part of science that is based on poor computer models , that’s causing all these lockdowns.
    I live in New Zealand Many worship Queen Jacinda.

    Electrician came around other day, he was all into the covid stuff(getting his vaccines etc),everyone needs to be vaccinated to beat it etc etc blah blah), then when I mentioned about electric vehicles, he said “load of nonsense electric vehicles are…”

    People cannot see the forest from the trees, they see one problem but then believe in all the covid hype.

  11. Jeff Johnson

    I remember back in the late ’90s, early ‘2000s watching a documentary on global warming where they interviewed some climate scientist about the model he was using. He flat out stated that they could “predict what they global climate and temperatures would be for futures years”. When I heard that I knew that the field of “climate change” was full of $hit. As a PhD in applied mathematics working in forecasting methodology, I knew that if someone makes that kind of statement they’re selling you something. And everything I’ve seen since then has proven me correct.

    1. Cap Allon

      Brilliant! Thanks Jeff.

      Do you recall the name of the documentary?


      1. Jeff Johnson

        I really can’t say at this point as it was a while ago. I wish that I could as the arrogance was amazing (but not unexpected).

        In other news, I need to proof my posts as my grammar sucks in what I wrote above.

  12. Richard Hoadley

    2022 and still most Governments are failing to check the science.
    The resultant taxes will only cripple society everywhere

Leave a Comment