Letters to the editor | Taking sides on carbon; GM sensationalism; Australia's population boom

As food producers we rely on the use of a large portion of the planet to make our living feeding civilization. Farmers have much to lose economically from mindless bureaucratic restrictions as Governments grapple to fix a problem which quite simply does not exist. The demographic with most to lose are the poorest humans, as limiting food production will affect them first and most drastically.

As farmers we need to decide which side to the debate we are on. We cannot be on both sides, if we want to play along with the scam and earn money from carbon credits we also must accept reducing livestock numbers, methane taxes, forced fallows, compulsory acquisitions, industrial wind, and solar instillations damaging rural landscapes and their immediate climates, vehicle emission standards eliminating appropriate work utilities and the current lunacy of pumping industrial waste into the Great Artesian Basin in the name of carbon capture and storage.

Those on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) hace themselves conceded the warming effect of each additional molecule of Co2 released into the atmosphere decreases logarithmically. This explains why there was no runaway greenhouse warming when our planet had Co2 concentrations of 20 times today's 0.04 per cent.

Historic Co2 levels have accurately been measured in trapped air bubbles from the longest continuous accumulations of ice in Antarctica and Greenland with records going back 810,000 years and 150,000 years respectively. Science also has uncovered 65 million years of temperature data from oxygen isotope records of deep ocean sediment cores showing the earth is cycling through ice ages and interglacial periods and the current increase in Co2 and temperature has been a normal occurrence on planet earth.

An increase of 120 parts per million of Co2 since the industrial revolution may seem significant when viewed through the microscope of current times. Geologically it is not significant and certainly not extreme.

Throughout the past 140 million years, atmospheric Co2 levels have been falling from 2500ppm to 300ppm and have risen to 420ppm since the beginning of the industrial revolution. The climate alarmists have said that 400ppm was a tipping point for the earth which would have dire existential consequences. Tipping points are not science, they are propaganda.

What should be more alarming to humanity is the scientific fact that if the world's Co2 concentrations halved from it is current level, agriculture would collapse and humanity would starve. If Co2 levels reached 150ppm most terrestrial plant life would become extinct along with all the animal and human life which depends on plants.

'Global warming' morphed into 'climate change' because the planet refused to keep getting warmer as the Co2 concentrations increased, since 1945 70pc of that time frame we have seen flat or declining temperatures.

We now have media-driven hysteria of fueling a mass delusion that Co2 is bad for the planet. The more Co2 we have in the atmosphere the more plants will grow and the more Co2 will be drawn down, planet earth has been managing 'climate change' for the past 4.5 billion years.

Once a problem is monetised then politicised it is almost impossible to distinguish from what is climate debate and what is political ideology. The threat to humankind is not climate change but a group of despots who think your life and lifestyle is in the way of their goal to save the planet.

Sadly, if their agenda is not stopped it will lead to unprecedented human suffering, deaths, and the destruction of the ecosystems they are purporting to care for. There just is nothing good that can come from the anti-Co2 agenda, not environmentally, socially, or economically.

GEORGE KING, Carcoar.

With regard to the article "Aussie have a taste for balanced information and sustainable food solutions", published across The Land and Farmonline on April 8, Australia's appreciation for science and its benefit to our everyday lives over many decades has indeed come a long way from declarations of genetically modified foods as "witchcraft".

Hence the disappointment when articles like this try to drag us back to the dark ages where GM and microwaves are still "magic".

This sensationalised editorialism does its readers and food supply a disservice by unnecessarily frightening people away from safe, fresh, affordable and nutritious foods.

Billions of dollars in plant science research and development, supported by strict standards and clear regulatory guidelines, have continually improved the technologies that equip farmers with the tools they need to face growing challenges and produce food more sustainably.

Any crops or foods entering the food supply chain are thoroughly and scientifically assessed by Food Standards Australia New Zealand and the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator which conduct transparent public consultation and clear labelling standards.

To assert "But our investigation has revealed those labelling rules are rubbery at best" is not only a falsehood, but indicates a complete lack of basic understanding about how a GM product is regulated in accordance with clear scientific evidence and the associated mandatory food labelling laws.

There is not one single documented case of harm from consuming a GM food.

Globally, GM crops have also facilitated no-till farming practices, preventing soil erosion and 26 billion kilograms of CO2 from entering the atmosphere.

And since GM cotton was introduced in 1993, cotton is grown with 95 per cent less insecticide use.

MATTHEW COSSEY, CEO CropLife Australia.

More people are rejecting the arguments for a "big Australia", according to the latest survey by The Australian Population Research Institute released on April 9.

Data was collected last December from a random sample of 3000 voters matched to the national distribution of age, gender and location.

On the question, "do you think Australia needs more people?" a decisive 71 per cent said "no", well above the finding in the 2022 survey. Further, only a minority supported the planned high level of immigration and the oft-quoted arguments that it is needed to offset population ageing or skills shortages.

Arrivals will drop from last year's record high, but ABS projections still show our population increasing from today's 27 million to between 32m and 38m by 2050. The government needs to heed the views of the electorate.

IAN PENROSE, Kew, Vic.

It's been reported the government has given $4.6 billion to Rolls Royce to build nuclear reactors for our submarines. Rolls Royce has stated this funding will create over 1000 jobs in Derby, England.

On Thursday, April 11, Albanese said "there is a race for jobs and opportunity. We can't afford to be vulnerable by not making things here. We also can't afford to continue to export all our resources, wait for someone else to add the jobs and import it back".

If labor is serious about creating jobs in Australia, why are they giving $4.6 billion of our tax money to an English company to create 1000 jobs in England?

We could build the reactors for our subs here and build others for export to our allies, instead of labor exporting our money and our jobs!

STEVE COXHEAD, Nemingha.

Peter Dutton, in a vitriolic and divisive speech at the Sydney Opera House on Wednesday evening, said "something is rotten in the state of Australia". He's right. It's him and his Trump-like approach to campaigning for power.

KEITH HILL, New Acton.