A For The 2015 Calendar Year, Or Tax Year Beginning C Name Of Organization B Check I: Fill & Download for Free

The carbon tax raises the cost of using carbon dioxide with a levy paid to the Federal Government. It is intended to make the climate colder and is therefore controversial and most unnecessary and harmful especially to those on low income.In Canada, the federal government is implementing a coordinated nation-wide carbon price, beginning at $10 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions in 2018 and rising to $50 per tonne. As of 2017, over 65 jurisdictions, representing about 15% of global GHG emissions, have put a price on carbon.WikipediaGovernments around the world signed the Paris Agreement agreeing to reduce so called greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to arrest runaway global warming.This is a great unnecessary debacle as there is no global warming to arrest. The earth is cooling and especially in Canada. Man-made warming is pseudo-science without evidence as Co2 is non-toxic plant food and at near zero percentage of the atmosphere cannot control the climate like a greenhouse.REFERENCESNASA Admits Climate Change Is Due To Earth’s Variable Solar OrbitPublished onSeptember 3, 2019Written by Ethan HuffFor more than 60 years, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has known that the changes occurring to planetary weather patterns are completely natural and normal.But the space agency, for whatever reason, has chosen to let the man-made global warming hoax persist and spread, to the detriment of human freedom.It was the year 1958, to be precise, when NASA first observed that changes in the solar orbit of the earth, along with alterations to the earth’s axial tilt, are both responsible for what climate scientists today have dubbed as “warming” (or “cooling,” depending on their agenda). In no way, shape, or form are humans warming or cooling the planet by driving SUVs or eating beef, in other words.But NASA has thus far failed to set the record straight, and has instead chosen to sit silently back and watch as liberals freak out about the world supposedly ending in 12 years because of too much livestock, or too many plastic straws.In the year 2000, NASA did publish information on its Earth Observatory website about the Milankovitch Climate Theory, revealing that the planet is, in fact, changing due to extraneous factors that have absolutely nothing to do with human activity. But, again, this information has yet to go mainstream, some 19 years later, which is why deranged, climate-obsessed leftists have now begun to claim that we really only have 18 months left before the planet dies from an excess of carbon dioxide (CO2).The truth, however, is much more along the lines of what Serbian astrophysicist Milutin Milankovitch, after whom the Milankovitch Climate Theory is named, proposed about how the seasonal and latitudinal variations of solar radiation that hit the earth in different ways, and at different times, have the greatest impact on earth’s changing climate patterns.Support our mission to keep you informed: Discover the extraordinary benefits of turmeric gummy bears and organic “turmeric gold” liquid extract, both laboratory tested for heavy metals, microbiology and safety. Naturally high in potent curcuminoids. Delicious formulations. All purchases support this website (as well as your good health). See availability here.The below two images (by Robert Simmon, NASA GSFC) help to illustrate this, with the first showing earth at a nearly zero orbit, and the second showing earth at a 0.07 orbit. This orbital change is depicted by the eccentric, oval shape in the second image, which has been intentionally exaggerated for the purpose of showing the massive change in distance that occurs between the earth and the sun, depending on whether it is at perihelion or aphelion.“Even the maximum eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit – 0.07 – it would be impossible to show at the resolution of a web page,” notes the Hal Turner Radio Show. “Even so, at the current eccentricity of .017, the Earth is 5 million kilometers closer to Sun at perihelion than at aphelion.”For more related news about climate change and global warming from an independent, non-establishment perspective, be sure to check out ClimateScienceNews.com.The Biggest Factor Affecting Earth’s Climate Is The SUNAs for earth’s obliquity, or its change in axial tilt, the below two images (Robert Simmon, NASA GSFC) show the degree to which the earth can shift on both its axis and its rotational orientation. At the higher tilts, earth’s seasons become much more extreme, while at lower tilts they become much more mild. A similar situation exists for earth’s rotational axis, which depending on which hemisphere is pointed at the sun during perihelion, can greatly impact the seasonal extremes between the two hemispheres.Based on these different variables, Milankovitch was able to come up with a comprehensive mathematical model that is able to compute surface temperatures on earth going way back in time, and the conclusion is simple: Earth’s climate has alwaysbeen changing, and is in a constant state of flux due to no fault of our own as human beings.When Milankovitch first put forward his model, it went ignored for nearly half a century. Then, in 1976, a study published in the journal Science confirmed that Milankovitch’s theory is, in fact, accurate, and that it does correspond to various periods of climate change that have occurred throughout history.In 1982, six years after this study was published, the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences adopted Milankovitch’s theory as truth, declaring that:“… orbital variations remain the most thoroughly examined mechanism of climatic change on time scales of tens of thousands of years and are by far the clearest case of a direct effect of changing insolation on the lower atmosphere of Earth.”If we had to sum the whole thing up in one simple phrase, it would be this: The biggest factor influencing weather and climate patterns on earth is the sun, period. Depending on the earth’s position to the sun at any given time, climate conditions are going to vary dramatically, and even create drastic abnormalities that defy everything that humans thought they knew about how the earth worked.But rather than embrace this truth, today’s climate “scientists,” joined by leftist politicians and a complicit mainstream media, insist that not using reusable grocery bags at the supermarket and not having an electric vehicle are destroying the planet so quickly that we absolutely must implement global climate taxes as the solution.“The climate change debate is not about science. It is an effort to impose political and economic controls on the population by the elite,” wrote one commenter at the Hal Turner Radio Show.“And it’s another way to divide the population against itself, with some who believe in man-made global warming and some who don’t, i.e. divide and conquer.”You can read the full Hal Turner Radio Show report at this link.Read more at www.naturalnews.comNASA admits climate change is due to Earth's variable solar orbit | PSI IntlCLOUDS NOT CO2 GOVERNS TEMPERATUIRESyrki Kauppinen and Pekka Malmi, from the Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Turku, in their paper published on 29th June 2019 claim to prove that the “GCM-models used in IPCC report AR5 fail to calculate the influences of the low cloud cover changes on the global temperature. They show the small amount of human Co2 means there is no man-made effect on the climate….In a separate study, Japanese scientists have also suggested a much more important role for low clouds cover caused by an increase in cosmic rays resulting form the weakening of the earths magnetic filed.Prof. Masayuki Hyodo and his team Yusuke Ueno, Tianshui Yang and Shigehiro Katoh from the University of Kobe in Japan in their paper published this month in propose that the “umbrella effect” is the main factor behind climate change.“When galactic cosmic rays increased during the Earth’s last geomagnetic reversal transition 780,000 years ago, the umbrella effect of low-cloud cover led to high atmospheric pressure in Siberia, causing the East Asian winter monsoon to become stronger. This is evidence that galactic cosmic rays influence changes in the Earth’s climate.”“The Intergovernmental IPCC has discussed the impact of cloud cover on climate in their evaluations, but this phenomenon has never been considered in climate predictions due to the insufficient physical understanding of it”, comments Professor Hyodo. “This study provides an opportunity to rethink the impact of clouds on climate. When galactic cosmic rays increase, so do low clouds, and when cosmic rays decrease clouds do as well, so climate warming may be caused by an opposite-umbrella effect. The umbrella effect caused by galactic cosmic rays is important when thinking about current global warming as well as the warm period of the medieval era.”Finnish Scientists: Effect of human activity on climate change insignificantNO EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE FOR THE SIGNIFICANT ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGEJ. KAUPPINEN AND P. MALMIAbstract. In this paper we will prove that GCM-models used in IPCC report AR5 fail to calculate the influences of the low cloud cover changes on the global temperature. That is why those models give a very small natural temperature change leaving a very large change for the contribution of the greenhouse gases in the observed temperature. This is the reason why IPCC has to use a very large sensitivity to compensate a too small natural component. Further they have to leave out the strong negative feedback due to the clouds in order to magnify the sensitivity. In addition, this paper proves that the changes in the low cloud cover fraction practically control the global temperature…If we pay attention to the fact that only a small part of the increased CO2 concentration is anthropogenic, we have to recognize that the anthropogenic climate change does not exist in practicehttps://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165... (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165...)This just in from the Washington Post -WeatherMay storm dumps record snowfall in CanadaMay 25, 2018 | 10:07 AM EDTA late spring snowstorm dumped over a foot of snow in Gander, Newfoundland, on May 24, the most snow ever received so late in the season, according to local reports.https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/local/weather/may-storm-dumps-record-snowfall-in-canada/2018/05/25/0ed8f3b4-603f-11e8-b656-236c6214ef01_video.html?utm_term=.d094a31b4513Here is the data from 1990 to 2019 showing no warming in Canada from weather stations across the country.Source - The average of 9 Canada Stations Mean Monthly Temperatures for March shows no warming trend since 1990.http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/products/climate/climatview/list.php?&s=3&r=4&y=2019&m=3&e=0&k=1 …Greenhouse gases do not have a climate effect and if they did water vapour is 95% and Co2 only minor. Taxing carbon dioxide is therefore useless.GOVERNMENT ACTION NO IMPACT ON CO2A carbon tax to make the climate cooler is a dishonest and regressive money grab using fake science and wildly exaggerated scaremongering to pick our pockets. The earth is cooling why would we tax ourselves to make it cooler? There is no evidence of progressive warming globally or in Canada where a carbon tax was just imposed on April fools day.AXE THE TAX WON OUT IN AUSTRALIA AFTER COST BENEFIT STUDYMy Published CommentJames Grant Matkin
 The Canadian federal carbon tax implemented today is a bad April Fools joke as it will do nothing for the climate and will make Canada less competitive. Co2 is wholly beneficial minute and non-polluting plant food. Trump is right it is unproven as to any effect on the climate. Even if there was some effect taking action in Canada is futile while China and India push forward with new coal power plants every week. It is the classic dilemma of the tragedy of the commons. 'Axing the carbon tax' slogan defeated an Australian government recently because the public saw through the fog and dishonesty of the policy. Will Trudeau suffer the same fate?Trudeau: Trump Presidency Won't Change Canada's Carbon Price PlanOttawa freezes its way to coldest capital city in the worldTemperature slipped below those of capitals in Russia, Kazakhstan and MongoliaCBC News ·Posted: Jan 19, 2019 9:44 AM ET | Last Updated: January 19Ottawa is the seventh coldest national capital in the world based on average annual temperature. (Canadian Press)If you were out early Saturday morning and felt like you were in the coldest place on earth, you were right — at least when it comes to capital cities around the globe.The temperature in Ottawa fell below every other national capital in the world on Saturday morning — and that doesn't include the wind chill.Ulan Bator, the capital of Mongolia, is on average the coldest capital city in the world, according to World Atlas.But the temperature in Ottawa — ranked the seventh coldest capital based on annual average temperature — dipped to –24 C, compared to –23 C in Ulan Bator.With the wind chill it felt like minus Горящие туры из Минска: агентство SEAVIEW comparison here are the temperatures in other capital cities that are colder than Ottawa on average:Astana –3 CMoscow –4 CHelsinki –2 CReykjavik 1 CTallinn –2 CTo top it all off, Environment Canada has issued an extreme cold warning and a winter storm warning for Ottawa.Ottawa and some surrounding areas could see up to 25 centimetres of snow over the next 24 hours.https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/coldest-capital-city-in-world-1.4985296THE CLIMATE IS COOLING WHY TRY TO MAKE IT COLDER?The scientists were fooled by randomness and short term data.Climate change occurs when changes in Earth's climate system result in new weather patterns that last for at least a few decades, and maybe for millions of years.WikipediaWATER VAPOUR IS EVERYTHINGA closer look at the numbersCO2 IS HEAVIER THAN AIRThe average molecular weight of air is 29, and the molecular weight of carbon dioxide is 44. Therefore there is no fear of Co2 staying aloft like a blanket over the globe.“CO2 EMISSIONS ARE WHOLLY BENEFICIAL” PATRICK MOORE14th October, 2015 Lecture by Dr Patrick Moore in London at the Global Warming Policy Foundation outlining why our CO2 emissions are wholly beneficial, and may have even prevented the end of life on Earth.What They Haven't Told You about Climate Change Dr. Patrick MooreThe yellow sphere represents 1 to 2,500 molecules which is the amount of CO2 amongst the nitrogen and oxygen molecules in the air. TRY TO APPLY THIS MINUTE AMOUNT OF CO2 TO THE NEXT GRAPH OF A GREENHOUSE COVERING THE EARTH. Not possible to even imagine.There is too little Co2 to COVER ANYTHING this means carbon dioxide has nomeaningful role in the earth’s climate. The use of a greenhouse has a climate metaphor is the heart of great misunderstanding.The atmosphere of the planet is huge and notwithstanding our arrogance we are not a big factor.All the Co2 produced by us wild fires and volcanoes etc only amounts to 0.039% of the atmosphere.Here is another view of the minuscule reality of C02 in answer to a QUORA question about how long would it take to find a C02 molecule?This sort of statistic can usually be obtained using the binomial distribution function which is available in MS Excel.The odds of picking a molecule at random and getting a CO2 are 410 in a million or one in 2,439. This is a 0.041 percent chance.Plugging these numbers into Excel and solving by trial and error doesn’t work. I think the probability is so minuscule, that the algorithm doesn’t work.I found an internet site that solves the binomial distribution function, but it has limits on the inputs.I determined that after 5 hours of picking molecules, you’d have about a 10% chance of getting one CO2 molecule.The CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is something close to nothing.There is no observable physical data to support the ‘thought experiment’ of AGW. Recent German scientists research relying on more than 100 scientific papers find the theory is only ‘meritless conjecture.’Demonizing C02 emissions from fossil fuels is not based on any physical observations like most science theories, rather is is only a ‘thought experiment.’ Physical data contradicts the theory by showing the c02 does only correlates is at all with warming temperatures after the fact. SeeLet’s begin with peer reviewed papers that demolish the shoddy science demonizing Co2 plant food emissions from fossil fuels.GERMAN CLIMATE RESEARCH PAPERFalsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of PhysicsGerhard Gerlich, Ralf D. Tscheuschner(Submitted on 8 Jul 2007 (v1), last revised 4 Mar 2009 (this version, v4))The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that many authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier (1824), Tyndall (1861), and Arrhenius (1896), and which is still supported in global climatology, essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system. According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist. Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology and in a widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation. In this paper the popular conjecture is analyzed and the underlying physical principles are clarified. By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 degrees Celsius is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.115 pages, 32 figures, 13 tables (some typos corrected)Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics (http://physics.ao-ph)Journal reference: Int.J.Mod.Phys.B23:275-364,2009DOI: 10.1142/S021797920904984XCite as: arXiv:0707.1161 [http://physics.ao-ph](or arXiv:0707.1161v4 [http://physics.ao-ph] for this version)PEER REVIEWIzvestiya, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics is a peer reviewed journal. We use a double blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes 75 reviewers, both internal and external (90%). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 30 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 30 days. The rejection rate for submitted manuscripts in 2017 was 20%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.Henrik Svensmark: While the Sun Sleeps“In fact global warming has stopped and a cooling is beginning. No climate model has predicted a cooling of the Earth – quite the contrary. And this means that the projections of future climate are unreliable,” writes Henrik Svensmark.A brilliant Danish scientist PROF HENRIK SVENSMARK explained this reality as follows:Svensmark: “global warming stopped and a cooling is beginning” – “enjoy global warming while it lasts”Anthony Watts / September 10, 2009While the sun sleepsTranslation approved by Henrik SvensmarkWhile the Sun sleepsHenrik Svensmark, Professor, Technical University of Denmark, CopenhagenThe star that keeps us alive has, over the last few years, been almost free of sunspots, which are the usual signs of the Sun’s magnetic activity. Last week [4 September 2009] the scientific team behind the satellite SOHO (Solar and Heliospheric Observatory) reported, “It is likely that the current year’s number of blank days will be the longest in about 100 years.” Everything indicates that the Sun is going into some kind of hibernation, and the obvious question is what significance that has for us on Earth.If you ask the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which represents the current consensus on climate change, the answer is a reassuring “nothing”. But history and recent research suggest that is probably completely wrong. Why? Let’s take a closer look.Scrutinizing the atmospheric greenhouse effect and its climatic impactGreenhouse EffectBased On ‘Physically Irrelevant Assumptions’Atmospheric scientists Dr. Gerhard Kramm, Dr. Ralph Dlugi, and Dr. Nicole Mölders have just published a paper in the journal Natural Sciencethat exposes the physical and observational shortcomings of the widely-accepted 288 K – 255 K = 33 K greenhouse effect equation. They conclude that this “thought experiment” is “based on physically irrelevant assumptions and its results considerably disagree with observations.”Scrutinizing the atmospheric greenhouse effect and its climatic impactABSTRACTIn this paper, we scrutinize two completely different explanations of the so-called atmospheric greenhouse effect: First, the explanation of the American Meteorological Society (AMS) and the World Meteorological Organization (W?MO) quantifying this effect by two characteristic temperatures, secondly, the explanation of Ramanathan et al. [1] that is mainly based on an energy-flux budget for the Earth-atmosphere system. Both explanations are related to the global scale. In addition, we debate the meaning of climate, climate change, climate variability and climate variation to outline in which way the atmospheric greenhouse effect might be responsible for climate change and climate variability, respectively. In doing so, we distinguish between two different branches of climatology, namely 1) physical climatology in which the boundary conditions of the Earth-atmosphere system play the dominant role and 2) statistical climatology that is dealing with the statistical description of fortuitous weather events which had been happening in climate periods; each of them usually comprises 30 years. Based on our findings, we argue that 1) the so-called atmospheric greenhouse effect cannot be proved by the statistical description of fortuitous weather events that took place in a climate period, 2) the description by AMS and W?MO has to be discarded because of physical reasons, 3) energy-flux budgets for the Earth-atmosphere system do not provide tangible evidence that the atmospheric greenhouse effect does exist. Because of this lack of tangible evidence it is time to acknowledge that the atmospheric greenhouse effect and especially its climatic impact are based on meritless conjectures.Harrison H. Schmitt and William Happer: In Defense of Carbon DioxideThe demonized chemical compound is a boon to plant life and has little correlation with global temperature.Record early winter snow in AUSTRALIA is not evidence of a planet suffering runaway warming.WINTER COMES EARLY DOWN UNDER: EARLIEST RECORDED SNOWFALL IN WESTERN AUSTRALIADate: 20/04/19ABC NewsIt is the earliest recorded snow event in the state’s history.Western Australia’s south-west received an unexpected surprise on Good Friday, with snowfall on Bluff Knoll in the Stirling Ranges.A flurry was recorded on the peak, the highest point in the Stirling Ranges, about 100 kilometres north of Albany, after 2:00pm on Friday.It is the earliest recorded snow eventin a calendar year in the state’s history.The last recorded fall before this time was April 20, 1970, according to Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) records.Dozens of hikers made the trek up the 1099-metre tall Bluff Knoll on Friday, which generally records light snow a couple of times each winter but rarely in April.Winter comes early down under: Earliest recorded snowfall in Western Australia - The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)