More Leaks – Copenhagen in disarray

That’s either an enormously thick-skinned balloon,it’s sited atop an enormously high building or children aren’t allowed air-rifles in Denmark.

Great and Mighty-
It’s a bubble that is about to burst.

They wouldn’t have been able to sell this at home if we were obligated to live in the same penurious conditions as they want to impose on the rest of the world.

Any of the UN officials at Copenhagen who are concerned about these leaks can find a solution by clicking on the Google ad for “Acme Leak Detection and Plumbing” I see at the bottom of this post. :-:
Ron

Take any and all agreements signed at Copenhagen by the left and right corners, rip… fold in half and rip again. Continue until a pile of fire starter is achieved. Strike match, enjoy the warmth. Mr Harper are you listening?

I didn’t think my jaw could drop any further…

To misquote the A Team – “Don’t you just love it when a scam falls apart?”

Un.
Raveling.

JMacqueen is right, this is about the money. BO and company get to add a huge source of tax revenue that has no strings attached. No one will really be able to tell if emissions get reduced or not. The rest of the world will be repressed as usual, only this time we are doing it to them instead of them doing it to themselves.

Hmmm … odd, nothing on BBC News 24 or their website about this yet 😉

No wonder Obama shifted his arrival from the beginning [embarrassing Climategate] to the end [sign on the dotted that gives him leverage].
I’m still reeling from the attempt by the EPA to classify CO2 as a pollutant – [snip]?
It is beyond parody – do these people know nothing at all?
I keep telling friends that CO2 is the building block of life and is a tiny fraction of the atmosphere – they go ‘no – it’s bad for us – look at the drowning polar bears’.
I can’t believe that in 2009, the average person has zero grasp of even the most basic facts of how life on Earth works.

Another leak suits me fine.
It’s now time to focus on the real problems we have, the abundance toxic contaminants world wide, the rain forest, the endangered animals, birds and fish.

As there are now so many threads on this site it is difficult to know where best to post material, so I apologise if this is OT (and also a little long). Perhaps a thread designed for comments on the FOIA.zip contents would be useful?
Reading some of the Climategate materials today, I came across this text, within a document entitled prescient.doc (Palaeoclimatic Research and Earth System Modelling for Enhanced ClImatic and ENvironmental PredicTion) which is essentially a proposal to gain funding:
“We propose a joint five-year Earth Science/Atmospheric Science Thematic Programme of Research designed to enable more rigorous testing of the capabilities and reliability of GCMs, with a specific focus on increasing the sophistication and versatility of the Earth System model being developed at the UK Meteorological Office Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research (HC).”
Further down within the body text is this:
“The reality of climate change on many timescales is widely appreciated. However, the need to quantify the contributions of different ‘natural’ and anthropogenic forcings to recent climate change and their roles in future climate, are issues that have now also gained virtually universal recognition. It is self evident that there are enormous environmental, economic, societal and hence political implications for gaining a practical understanding of the factors that govern the mean states and the variability of the world’s present and future climates. Achieving a ‘correct’ and timely attribution of human induced climate change and providing realistic estimates of its impacts and the likely rates of induced changes, represent major and urgent scientific challenges.”
Now call me a cynic if you wish….
The word was used exactly as shown above (i.e. within quotation marks). I am not sure whether the use of the quotation marks has the same resonance in all countries, but in the UK, it is not unusual for such use to imply something, along the lines of “we all know what we are talking about here, don’t we”.
If I had used the word “correct” (i.e. in quotes, exactly as it was used in the document) in such a context it would almost certainly therefore have been code, for what I really meant (but would not want to state unequivocally).
What I really meant here would have been “the politically correct”, or “right answer for our paymasters”, rather than the “accurate” answer.
So, I suggest, that this document (apparently created in 1998) is rather interesting in the genesis/development of the AGW scam.
[Note: in the U.S., quotation marks mean the words between them are being quoted verbatim. ~dbs, mod.]

John Cooke. Yes, the BBC isn’t what it once was, I’m afraid. It took them almost two weeks to run proper news items on the CRU leak!

The ultimate cynicism!
I’m appalled and unsurprised at the hubris of these children masquerading as adults.
I don’t wish to enslave my country nor those of the developing nations.
Grrmphh…arrgghhhh…these people make me ill. I would like to see this blow up in their collective faces.

‘Oh what a tangled web they weave’
‘Shooting fish in a barrell’
How many more cliched idioms are they going to subject themselves to?

Last week, Piers Corbyn was in a tv interview about climate change. Mostly he argued the science with a Russian staffer at WWF. However, right at the end he said something that seemed counter intuitive.
Most skeptics assume that the developed nations are about to sleepwalk into a new treaty which will transfer wealth to the developing world. Corbyn said the opposite: the AGW scare is designed by the developed nations to stop the developing nations from catching up. And yet, this leak does seem to suggest a conspiracy along those lines.
• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.
• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;
Maybe Western leaders are smarter than we have given them credit for, and are gaming the system to benefit of the West.

The most telling thing here is that they want to move power from the UN to the World Bank. It IS all about the money and a cabal of powerful world leaders and billionaires. They finally show their hand that it is not about helping the earth but about lining their pockets so that they can continue to fly around on private jets and eating caviar on the backs of “the people of earth”.
The billionaires behind this need to be exposed and jailed. The politicians need to be exposed, charged, and removed from government. Then the sane people of the planet can start to rebuild it based on freedom, liberty, integrity, and free market capitalism.

Dividing the loot is the point when criminal gangs naturally fall apart.

Isn’t it clear that this was the work of a Russian hacker?
Ecotretas

Cleavage in the American Physical Society :
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/12/08/taking_liberties/entry5933353.shtml

Somebody serve a FOIA on the Feds for all documents and things pertaining to the Secret Danish Agreement.

Don’t assume it is in disarray in the sense that it will “fail”. Leaks are part of the game. We can hope there is no agreement, but ….

I went to the Guardian site and read some of the comments and that was illuminating. Half the comments were deleted, almost the rest were decring about how they needed to get things done why do this and there was a few that said, well we told ya it wasn’t about the science, wraming or the planet it was about the money.
If you take the leak at face value as real, it makes one wonder the intelligence level of these people that are still clamoring for action especially in light of climategate. How can you not see the obvious? If the US, uk and the other western nations are looking to do away with the UN oversight after rigging the game that ought to tell them something right there. If they really had that rock hard science that omg were all going to die those governments wouldn’t be rigging the emissions game like they are. Hmm the CRU, GISS and NCDC just so happens to be in those countries named and 2 of them are government agencies and the third gets grants from government agencies plus money from companies that will make money off AGW. Nope all coincedence.

Not just the leaked document, but also the reaction shows clearly that its about money and not about ‘saving the planet’.
It also shows that at least some countries have woken up to he fact that they are supposed to impoverish their people so that their money can flow into the coffers of those who ‘govern’ the so-called developing countries. We can be certain that these payments won’t help those in real need.
Its a global welfare system, based on the experience of socialism. One thing worth remembering is that socialism, of any stripe, aims to level down, not at pulling the poorest up.
Blaiming it on CO2 plays nicely on the guilt all Westerners are supposed to feel.
What does science, even the junk science coming from CRU and The Team, have got to do with it?

I propose we commit all those who attended this conference to an extended stay at McLean Hospital in Belmont.

Is there anyone at Columbia University that doesn’t support a Socialist New World Order?

I think this sums it all up:
Never on the field of scientific endevour have so many been duped by so few.

If I was a Malthusian, I would be looking to give developed countries more power to hold back developing countries.
Being a Malthusian doesn’t require any compassion. It is more likely to be like the George Carlin clip posted earlier—we’re just looking to protect what we (in the developed world) have already got.

Still reading through the “Danish Text” that accompanied the article, but I just have to say here’s what it’s looking like… Poor countries do nothing but sell carbon credits to richer countries, richer countries make everything, poorer countries buy stuff using carbon credit money… We’re all happy, right?
This is meant to allay fears that this will cost the U.S. more jobs. But come on, you socialist morons… a net loss of productivity in the world isn’t going to be over-come by suppressing outrage in some countries! But that is what this is. It’s protectionism. Protectionism of the elitists (provided we fall for it).
That said, I wouldn’t worry about a transfer of wealth so much as an evopration of it.
And I don’t think I need to say what THAT means.

OMG… Bernarditas Muller was just dropped out of the talks.
From http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/04/copenhagen-climate-cummit-talks-critic
“The US and Europe have been accused of employing underhand diplomatic tactics ahead of the Copenhagen climate change summit after one of their strongest developing country critics was dismissed from a national delegation.
The Philippine government gave no official reason for dropping Bernarditas Muller, a key negotiator on behalf of the 130 G77 developing countries. But non-governmental groups said it was clearly linked to her long-standing opposition to US and European attempts to abandon the Kyoto protocol, the legal agreement that commits rich countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions.”

Pigs who thought they were headed to the trough find out they might be headed to the slaughterhouse. This is all about money and power, not the environment.

“The US and Europe have been accused of employing underhand diplomatic tactics”
The Chicago Way goes global.

It will be interesting to see if politicians start distancing themselves from the whole AGW scam.This should give them an out.

Sorry to be pessimistic, but so far, the leaked code has had little impact on any of the “true believers” within government, mass media or within entrenched political circles that venerate this movement. The true believers have merely ramped up the “few bad apples don’t ruin the harvest” line, and have proceeded to repeat the same slogans that they’ve been making for years.
Copenhagen might be in “disarray,” but it’s not in disarray for the right reasons. It should be in disarray because the so-called science of AGW is not science but politics and propaganda. The complaining in Copenhagen is all about how much to cut, and who cuts what for how much. There is virtually no questioning of the premise that lies behind this group-think festival.
The irony to this whole road show is that the true believers still don’t have to prove their case. Instead, they merely demand that “skeptics” disprove it, and then disparage the skeptics when they do so. When it comes to propaganda technique, [snip].
[REPLY – What they don’t get is that a few bad apples do ruin the applesauce. ~ Evan]

The only faulty part of this circle of agreement was its cone of silence

Maybe it has been done deliberately to give them a way to exit the stage gracefully.This may be the end.If so,it’s a rotten ending.

Mike A. (09:15:01) :
Cleavage in the American Physical Society :
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/12/08/taking_liberties/entry5933353.shtml
First rational post by CBS I’ve heard of, and I congratulated them for it.
It’s very good.
REPLY: oh, that’s a headline that cries out for a photo – Anthony

I looked up Lysenko in Wikipedia when some parallels between then and now seemed to leap out. The “Then” stuff is directly from Wikipedia.
Then) Lysenko rejected Mendelian genetics for his theory of environmentally acquired inheritance and adopted them into a powerful political scientific movement termed Lysenkoism.
Now) A few climate scientists develop a theory the earth’s temperature is rising and the cause is man-made CO2. This theory is adopted into a powerful political scientific movement called AGW.
Then) Lysenko became director of the Institute of Genetics within the USSR’s Academy of Sciences.
Now) Phil Jones becomes the director of East Anglia University Climate Research Unit (CRU).
Then) Soviet political bosses gave their support to Lysenko. This support was a consequence of policies by the Communist party to collectivize farming.
Now) Leftist politicians gave their support to AGW. This support was a consequence of these politicians trying to promote control over the economy.
Then) For the next several years Lysenko’s opponents were purged from held positions and many were imprisoned.
Now) For the next several years AGW opponents were purged from held positions and many skeptical scientists are marginalized as cranks.
Then) Lysenko was made responsible for ending the propagation of “harmful” ideas among Soviet scientists. Lysenko served this purpose by causing the expulsion, imprisonment, and death of hundreds of scientists and eliminating all study and research involving Mendelian genetics throughout the Soviet Union.
Now) The AGW scientists made themselves responsible for ending the propagation of “harmful” ideas among other scientists. They served this purpose by preventing dissenting scientific papers from being published, destroying data, calling skeptics “deniers” and manufacturing false science.
Then) In 1962 three prominent Soviet physicists presented a case against Lysenko, proclaiming his work as false science.
Now) In November of 2009, a brave person with a conscience leaks the CRU emails, data and computer programs.
Then) The Soviet press was soon filled with anti-Lysenkoite articles and appeals for the restoration of scientific methods to all fields of biology and agricultural science.
Now) Climategate goes viral on the internet. Scientists declare AGW a fraud and call for the restoration of scientific methods.
Then) Lysenko was removed from his post as director of the Institute of Genetics at the Academy of Sciences.
Now) Phil Jones steps down as the director of the CRU.
Then) In 1964 the president of the Academy of Sciences declared that Lysenko’s immunity to criticism had officially ended. An expert commission was sent to investigate Lysenko’s records. A few months later, a devastating critique of Lysenko was made public. As a result, Lysenko was immediately disgraced in the Soviet Union.
Now) This part is pending. It’s not history yet.

Vincent: (09:02:32)
“Maybe Western leaders are smarter than we have given them credit for, and are gaming the system to benefit of the West.”
IMHO you are SO CORRECT and very perceptive. I have never believed all this hogwash that the DEVELOPING WORLD was forcing
the WEST to drastically reduce their C02 footprints (except maybe try to).
I am from a developing country and I have NEVER EVER believed in the WEST committing ECONOMIC HARIKIRI!!! Pure and simple!
“He who pays the piper plays the tune.” via the WORLD BANK of course.
Western governments still want to tax your eyballs out though (double warming scammy :o).

REPLY: oh, that’s a headline that cries out for a photo – Anthony
You are a bad man.

“Copenhagen might be in “disarray,” but it’s not in disarray for the right reasons. It should be in disarray because the so-called science of AGW is not science but politics and propaganda.”
Even on our side it amazed me how many people still don’t “get it.”
it Isn’t about the science.
It was *never* about the science!!!
It is about power, and money, and control. The science has just been a convenient excuse, an expedient way to hoodwink the gullible. If the science falls into question it means the lying and the cheating is going to have to get a bit more thuggish and open, but it will NOT END until these institutions and the people backing them are knocked off their perches. The lust and drive for power will NOT end no matter what we find out about the science, which is why the exposure of the fraud has had no impact on the people pushing this.
The only good thing to come of the fraud is that the true scientists might now just gain enough allies to overthrow the media, the “green lobby”, and all of the current governments who support this chicanery. Until all of those are overthrown and replaced, this war will not end.

Robert: re Cone of Silence
What?

“the circle of commitment” —- sounds like something out of a Dennis Wheatley novel.

Like other posters here, my jaw dropped. This is so weird. I’m tempted to call BS on this document.
If the document is true on a “secret” agreement between the U.S., U.K. and Denmark, then Obama has shown a level of realism that has escaped his mental capacity ’til now. If CO2-generated AGW theory is true, this document is explicit on what needs to be done – capping developing world CO2 generation at some level lower than the developed world’s. This developed world is inexorable and unavoidable unless their politicians want to commit collective political suicide. But to put this position into a “secret” agreement just when you enter into talks with the developing world on AGW means you’re not dealing in good faith. So by leaking the draft of the document you may be seeking to force the developing world to walk out on what the developed world now understands to be a really, really bad deal based on corrupted science.
But this document sounds a little bogus. It seems as if it could be a really bad creation of a lousy agent provocateur with crappy timing trying to frost the developing world into confronting and humiliating the developed world into even greater concessions to show their “good faith” in the negotiations. Which could likely backfire with the constituents back in the developed world’s democracies.
If I had been the leaker, I might have waited a few days or a week or so to torpedo the proceedings before the conference reached any agreements and give the participants a chance to recover.
Wheels within wheels. My head’s spinning.
In any case, this is gonna be fun to watch. Pass the popcorn!

This post in the Telegraph, as well as spreading the smoking gun, claims that the story about Himalayan glaciers disappearing by 2035 should have read 2350. Someone at the IPCC misread the figure !
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100019301/climategate-another-smoking-gun/
Will someone tell the BBC. Tell the Labour Party. Tell the Conservative Party. Tell the Libdems.

Crosspatch has it exactly right in comment way further up on this thread:
If the world and especially the USA was at all serious about solving our energy problems (which are real) and as much as possible breaking our dependence on foreign oil imports (which continue at ridiculous levels), the solution is:
NUCLEAR POWER. And I refer to the ready-2-go designs for efficient and passively-safe Generation-III+ reactors; eventually to be followed by companion Generation-IV fast-neutron reactors that can reduce the amount of nuclear waste by an order of magnitude or more; and that can reduce the time said waste needs to be segregated from the environment by TWO orders of magnitude. See http://www.inl.gov and etcetera.
So here is one simple test for judging the real intent and focus of COP15:
What percentage of the conference is spent seriously discussing and planning for a major increase in nuclear power generation; at least in the developed countries and/or those who fully submit to both the letter and the spirit of the IAEA inspection regime ??
If answer to above is zero or close enough so the difference doesn’t matter (that’s my bet), you can be sure of one thing:
COP15 is NOT about supporting objective and unbiased science. . . .

The majority of the responces on this article makes it seem like this ‘ Danish Text ‘ is another ‘ nail in the coffin ‘ in respect to the argument of the Anthropological Global Warming issue .
Before everyone begins to pop the corks on the champaign , you better stop and think , or better yet stop and research before you build your float for the ‘ Defeat of the Anthropological Global Warming ‘ parade .
I have downloaded a copy ( 15 pgs ) of this document and will read it later but the points explained in this article leaves alot of loose ends and ties alot of ends together as well .
Begin with a leaked Danish Text comes weeks after the , most likely leaked and Not hacked ‘ ClimateGate files from the CRU were obtained . It’s stated that this leaked document was leaked TO: the Guardian but do you know where or how it was leaked from ?
We have a ‘ Circle of Commitment ‘ mentioned in the document that supppsely had worked on this ‘ secret draft ‘ but understood it to include the United Kingdom, United States and Denmark ? Who understood it to include these countries ?
Why is this ‘ leaked ‘ document surfacing at a time when ‘ leaked ‘ data from the CRU is currently drawing all of the attention, and conclusions at COP15 ?
Why is it stated that only a handful of countries have been shown this document and then two paragraphs before states that ” developing countries reacted furiously to the leaked documents ” ? So how many countries have actually viewed this document ? and more importantly , it’s stated that this Danish Text was ” Finalized ” last week ? Is the document dated ?
I am a little curious about how this draft agreement , if authenic is sidelining the United Nation’s negotiating role ? The skeptics of Man Made Global Warming have already concluded in their minds and from the evidence within the leaked CRU data ( ClimateGate files ) that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in their efforts to ignore the incriminating contents in the ClimateGate files are not only ignoring it but are instead primarily focusing on the legailities of How the files were obtained . The Skeptics of Man Made Global Warming may be presuming that the IPCC, in their disterests to the contents of the fraudulent emails and data may be an accessory or even the Primary Suspect to the CRU Conspiracy .
As I understand , there are three main Global Temperture datasets :
* The University of East Anglia’s Hadley Climate Research Unit
* NOAA/GHCN, the Global Historical Climate Network
* NASA/GISS, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies
The Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) and the University of East Anglia’s Hadley Climate Research Unit (CRU) receives almost all of their raw data from the Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN) . The CRU reports to their directors , the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the IPCC reports to their directors , The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) .
It all ends up at the United Nation’s so therefore if ClinmateGate is able to survive a investigation into the Scandal and Conspiracy it is , then the United Nations must answer to the charges . This is all very interesting because now we have the Danish Texts victimizing the potential roots of the ClimateGate Conspiracy ?
Now rumor has it, thru the Danish Text that the UN Copenhagen Climate Talks may be asked to sign a agreement that hands more power to Rich countries and sidelines the UN’s role in all future climate change negotiations ? ? ?
Is this a Cop-Out or what ! ClimateGate is the Largest Scandal in any Science in the history of the world . Is it SO large that the United Nations , working for the Global Elite , is being scraped in fear of being Exposed and by being exposed , could lead the the preverbial tip of the iceberg ?
Remember , ” . . . It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks . . . ” and ” . . . It effectively is the end of the UN process . . . ”
Are they the Riches Countries in the World or the Riches People and Corporations in the World ? As stated in the Danish Text , the draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the WORLD BANK ! Money talks and when they want more at any costs , then it will be ” . . . without discussion on the talks . . .”
Simply Amazing ! ! !

JerryM (13:26:04) : “Like other posters here, my jaw dropped. This is so weird. I’m tempted to call BS on this document.”
I was thinking the same thing. It certainly doesn’t sound like the drivel that’s been coming out of our Dear Leader’s mouth lately, and I don’t see how any Western leader could believe the Copenhagen conference would agree to it. Methinks somebody may be trying to embarrass the West into more concessions. It’s just so…so…politically incorrect.

I have two thoughts:
1) Hansen and his pronouncement on Cophenhagen – Perhaps he’s realised the damage that he’s done and will be done in his name. Maybe he’s got cold feet?
2) Global governance through regulation of CO2. It sounds great in theory, but the array of politicians and diplomats are quite incapable of producing a workable plan. While it’s politically correct for every Government in the World to beat their breasts about CO2, the cracks are beginning to show in the narrative and it fall apart in a few months. Grandiosity?

Sean Peake (13:15:38) :
Robert: re Cone of Silence
What?
It’s a reference from the spy comedy TV series “Get Smart”. It was supposed to be a secure way of communicating but never really worked properly…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_of_Silence
It dates me, but I did enjoy the series.

I have it on good authority (a secret IPCC confirmed COP15 protocol) that “Circle of Commitment” is the new Robert Ludlum book about to become a blockbuster movie staring Matt Damon as the forgetful warmist who with his pet polar bear, Iceberg, saves the world from the evil “denialists”. Also starring Al Gore as the penguin without a home, John Travolta as Matt Damon’s private pilot, and Leonardo DiCaprio as himself–a totally confused actor.

@Mariss
I love it.

The World Bank is not a nice institution. There is a laundry list of issues they have with actually fulfilling their ‘mission’ of helping developing countries. The leftist movement in South America exists because many of these complaints are valid yet go unaddressed. It would be a bad move to put them in charge of anything more than what they have, which I contend is too much in the first place.

RC Saumarez (14:48:59) :
Hansen contends, correctly, that cap and trade is ineffective. He is a proponent of a direct carbon tax.

Please disregard what I wrote, wrong thread.

Sean Peake (15:11:44) :
Kath. I know. I was trying to be funny by repeating a line the Chief always said. Note I said trying—many have told me that I was trying… in every sense of the word (a line courtesy from “Just a MInute”)
:-))

I think the time has come to get out the pitchforks and sharpen the tines.

I’ll fetch the torches

Why does the balloon say “Hopenhagen” instead of “Hopenchangen”? That’s my burning question for the evening.

Anthony, this is about Cap and Trade but this is scary…
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/12/woman-who-invented-credit-default-swaps.html

This whole process sucks – its all about politics and green-washing the biggest players.
The most outrageous action by the so called NGOs was the recent “Fossil of the Day” nominations by so called Climate Action Network. They blamed Austria, Finland and Sweden for… what? Not agreening with NGOs’ stand for carbon sinks?
Anyhow, this seems to be all that you gain by maximizing renewable energy use is just – nothing… (Austria, Finland and Sweden happen to be the most advanced countries in this area – e.g., renewable sources contribute about 27% of all energy use in Finland compared to the super powers of green energy, e.g., Denmark 14% and Germany 5.8%).

Sean Peake (13:15:38) :
Robert: re Cone of Silence
What?
It’s a reference from the spy comedy TV series “Get Smart”. It was supposed to be a secure way of communicating but never really worked properly…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_of_Silence
It dates me, but I did enjoy the series
———————————————————–
What?…can’t hear you.

If the “Danish text” is a hoax, it’s well designed to stoke all the paranoia of the developing world. If the governments claimed to be part of the “Circle of Commitment” aren’t denying it, then the document may contain enough truth that they fear inquiry into it.
China, India, and Brazil have been handed a golden opportunity to storm out in a huff, and the rest of the developing world might well follow.
And the thieves of the UN nomenklatura, seeing this as an attempt to cut them out of the loot, will turn on the “Circle of Commitment”.
More popcorn!

hro001 (10:11:23) : “An excerpt from the preamble: [snip]… Hmmm … gender equality, eh? How does this fit into the overarching goal of reduction of the dreaded CO2 emissions? Amazing, simply amazing.”
Yes, that did just come out of the blue, didn’t it? That was one point that made me do a doubletake, and I thought of this quote…
“Life is one crushing defeat after another… until you just wish Flanders was dead!” –Homer Simpson
Now granted, gender equality is a trait of developed nations, and developed nations are richer nations… I guess they figure that saying things will be equalized will reduce carbon, but that clearly contradicts that the richer the nation, the more carbon emissions it has!
So I’ve no idea what they mean by that. Then again, when did socialists ever make any sense?!

With regards to the posters saying this was never about science, but rather a political movement? That may or may not be true, but it is the science where you are going to catch these guys. The unholy trinity has always been the politicians, mass media, and scientists. You aren’t going to catch the politicians or media. They are way too savvy at this sort of thing. But the scientists are vulnerable. They got rowed aboard with promise of funding and fame, but never bargained for international scandal…and these uber-brains are not at all prepared to deal with it like the other two points of the trinity. See how fast Mann turned on Jones? All you need is a couple lawsuits or even better, a couple indictments…even if minor…and they will sing. These guys aren’t professional crooks. They started out as very smart scientists and lost their way at some point. They wanted to be the rockstars of science and it blew up in their faces. Give them a good solid shove, and they will bring down the whole ugly bag of snakes.

Up to now all the climate change talk has been just that. Talk. It was always obvious that the fight would really get going when countries actually had to do something. It’s also been fairly obvious that the industrial countries are running an energy policy masquerading as a climate policy. ‘Whatever you do, don’t use your energy yourself but it to us’. This sums it up:
Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.

Regarding the World Bank in this context:
The “Danish paper” availible at the Guardian’s site do not say anything about the World Bank. In paragraph 22 it talks about a Climate Fund whose board should be set up by the COP.
In a follow up article the Guardian gives the source for the World Bank, it is the suspicion of Antonio Hill that the board exchanged for the World Bank.
Here is the relevant quote:
Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: “This is only a draft, but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurt.”
Hill added: “It proposes a green fund to be run by a board, but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN.

“…more control over future talks within a “circle of commitment”…
Any bets on how long until it becomes a circular firing squad?

I’ve been following this all day now, and I’m not convinced that this leak is real.
1. The language, tone and desired outcomes are almost totally opposite to the other leaked Copenhagen agreement from a few months ago. Remember that one? The one with the massive transfer of wealth to developing countries. This document has developing countries supporting the developed countries. It also had the formation of a new world governemnt. This one seems to have the World Bank deeply involved. How come such a radically different document.
2. The timing is interesting, coming so soon into the meeting. More like a softening up process (“See? This is how bad it can get!”) than a genuine idea.
3. The MSM are all over this one like a rash, within seconds of the “leak”. How much coverage is there of Climategate?
This seems to me to be like a Penn & Teller card trick: You can pick any card, then as Penn goes off on a tangent and Teller mimes along, you forget that they forced you into taking the Three of Clubs.

I’m from Germany and I frequently read your wonderful website. I want to give you the link to danish text draft here in PDF-Form, so you don’t have to go through the ugly Guardian scroll scam:
http://thehill.com/images/stories/blogs/danishdraft.pdf
By the way, in Germany nearly nobody ever read the original draft of the Kopenhagen conference. Though I know that this website mainly deals with the scientific parts of the fraud, it should be obvious that this is in strong connection to the overall fraud, which goes way back to 1972 up till now together with an ever growing climate alarmism.
I therefore also want to give everyone the link to the original COP5 draft:
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/awglca6/eng/inf01.pdf
I think, that everyone who’s interested, should be able to get the whole picture of this overwhelming scientific AND political fraud. So, here is the
draft, which is the basis (along with the danish draft) of the conference:

Further rifts on day 3: http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/analysis/2254765/further-rifts-emerge-day-three
There appear to be a small group of pip-squeak poorer countries led by Tuvalu including the Cook Islands, Barbados and Fiji, as well as a number of poor African countries including Sierra Leone, Senegal and Cape Verde are holding the talks hostage until they get their proposal (the “Tuvalu Proposal”) considered.
Remember “The Mouse That Roared”? Well, perhaps these are the Rats That Roared. The good news is the lying thieving hypocrites are fighting amongst themselves. Science, Truth, and indeed, Democracy depends on the fighting continuing. We can only hope.

One person’s “disarray” is another’s method.

“. . . even by UN standards delegates are describing the Copenhagen climate conference as a circus.
Twenty-odd thousand green activists predominantly from developed countries are overwhelming the 8000 government officials and demanding meetings with delegations so they can push their proposals into any final agreement.”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/its-the-poor-who-will-pay-for-copenhagens-circus/story-e6frg6zo-1225809976343

Go Copenhagen, and don’t come back till your gone.