More Leaks – Copenhagen in disarray

Planet

Leaks may soon deflate this balloon

Leaking, again? These aren’t the CRUTape documents, but secret docs from “the Circle of Commitment”  describing the way some manipulators wanted Copenhagen’s agreement to pan out. See it here

This quote (from the Guardian article) sums it up pretty well:

“It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process,” said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.

At least one person had scruples, or we wouldn’t be hearing about it now.

From news.com.au

Copenhagen conference in ‘disarray’

TALKS at the United Nations climate change conference in Copenhagen have broken down over leaked documents indicating that wealthier nations would be given more power in future climate change negotiations.

The documents seem to allow a handful of rich countries to have larger emissions and more control over future talks within a “circle of commitment” and have enraged delegates from developing countries.

The US, UK, and Denmark are among the countries included in the so-called “Danish text.”

The document also sets unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.

The secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as “the circle of commitment” – understood to include the UK, US and Denmark –  has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week, The Guardian reports.

The agreement, leaked to the paper, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol’s principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act.

The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.

The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as “a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks”, the paper reports.

Advertisements

194 thoughts on “More Leaks – Copenhagen in disarray

  1. 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.

  2. Things have certainly been getting interesting lately….is this a sign of a revolution from within AGW circles?

    I wonder.

  3. 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.

  4. 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

  5. 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?

  6. Which crook is better at handling the money? The UN? Or the World Bank? I think that is the only issue they are fighting over. Who controls the money. Which is what climate change has been about from the beginning.

  7. I am skeptical of this story.

    If they drafted such a document and yet left out China and India those countries would head for the door in a heartbeat. Unless of course they ARE named in the list of ‘rich countries’ or perhaps they are given a separate but equally juicy deal.

  8. The Circle of Commitment document is here.

    It has this sentence: “Support the goal of a peak global emissions as soon as possible, but no later than [2020] ….”

    where the square brackets indicate that the final number is to be filled in.

    Peak global emissions in only 11 years !!

    These people either are stupid or they can’t do arithmetic.

  9. What can I say?

    I’m shocked and bewildered.

    (That we got to hear about it BEFORE it was signed into law)

  10. Hurray – first cheering thing I’ve read all day about Copenhagen – how do we tell the developing countries: just follow your instincts and learn from history – in the last 60 years, when have developed countries ever done anything but bankroll your dictators and buy your exports (from oil to coffee) other than at prices determined to keep you enslaved economically.

  11. It’s quite humorous how serious these would-be signatories are – their sense of power to influence planetary climate regimen – “to hold temperature rises to 2 degree Celsius”. I am sure Mother Earth will have the final say on this figure regardless of posturing humans’ “commitments”.

  12. I have been traumatized and have lost money because I thought the science was settled.

    I made decisions that rid myself of actual opportunities because of that ‘settled science’.

    When I found out that the ‘settled science’ was fabricated I was gutted.

    I now wish to find out how many people will be prepared to join me in a class action against the proponents of AGW so that I can recover the income I have lost and compensate me for the trauma and stress I have experienced because of their false statements.

    And, I do not need anyone to join my action.

    Kind regards
    Denis

  13. 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.

  14. @jmacqueen. Absolutely! Its about maintaining the status quo. Its about maintaining the Wests competitive and industrial edge over the rapidly industrialising deloping nations akin to keeping your foot on their heads to stop them getting further up the ladder than you. All this climate hooey is just a smokescreen.

  15. Greenpeace weighs in with:Draft climate proposal leaks out in Copenhagen
    December 8, 2009 | 8:08 am

    “The Danish proposal falls far short of emissions cuts needed, and remains vague on the climate cash,” Oxfam International, a group concerned with climate and global poverty issues, said in a press release after obtaining the draft text.

    The World Wildlife Fund’s Kim Carstensen said in a statement that the text is “weak and reflects a too elitist, selective and non-transparent approach by the Danish presidency.”

  16. 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.

  17. 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.

  18. What bugs me is that these people, who never stood for election, are sitting there negotiating how much gas I can buy to get to work, how much I can heat my home, how much my employer can expand, etc.

    Control of CO2 means absolute control of the economy. If we are not allowed to expand nuclear energy, then all energy production requires the creation of CO2. How does one get the copper for the wiring of turbine generators or electric motors without mining and smelting and drawing wire, shipping it to the manufacturer, etc? How does one ship batteries around and dispose of them without creating CO2?

    Once again, this really isn’t about CO2. We could embark on a nuclear generation program to replace nearly all the CO2 we currently produce from baseline power generation with technology that exists right this minute. But that isn’t the real issue. The real issue is turning over global economic control to a flock of unelected bureaucrats.

    By allocating CO2 emissions limits you allocate economic growth allowance. Controlling CO2 is controlling economic growth. Imagine you make ping-pong balls. How do you double your production without shipping twice as much product and running machines twice as much and doubling your “per capita” CO2 production?

    You could do it in a nuclear electric economy. You can’t do it in the sort of economy they are trying to build. How many windmills does it take to power a copper smelter or a blast furnace? You can’t do it. They are actually FORCING us to remain reliant on fossil fuel for large industrial power and allowing only certain countries to expand that sort of power production thereby allowing only certain countries to grow heavy industry.

    I really wish a major news outlet would explain that to people. You are constantly reminded of your darned lightbulbs but domestic household lighting is only a tiny fraction of total energy use in this country.

  19. 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.]

  20. Something or someone needs to put the brakes on this dreadful rollercoaster of global deceit, because all the press reports we’re hearing here in the UK seem to be egging on this loony leftwing greeniefest.. Especially now the WMO is saying that the last ten years have been warmer rather than cooler. Now I’M totally confused.

    Which is it, can ANYONE without an agenda say with any certainty?

  21. We can only hope this is true and not some sort of hokum. If it is then India & China will walk and the West will be saved the “redistributive” agony of Cap ‘n’ Trade.

  22. 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.

  23. Oh, this leak doesn’t change anything…

    The underlying science is unequivocal… it’s worse than we thought…

    These are just politicians behaving badly… the goals were taken out of context… everyone’s hidden agenda looks bad if you take it out of context…

    Think of the Polar Bears! Tuvalu is sinking! Increased hurricanes! Fire! Flood! Famine! Fear! Fear!

  24. 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.

  25. John Cooke (08:46:20) :

    Hmmm … odd, nothing on BBC News 24 or their website about this yet ;-)

    Oh, don’t worry – now the Glorious Grauniad has reported it, it’ll be on the list for broadcast :).

  26. How do we know the document was leaked to the Guarniad? It could have been the work of a Russian hacker.

  27. 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.

  28. This is like the Congress of Vienna, but worldwide in scope deciding both which countries and which businesses will gain and which will lose and Obama trying to portray himself as a latter-day Metternich.

  29. Didn’t the UN plagiarize that “Circle of Committment”/”Circle of Trust” concept from the Ben Stiller/Robert DeNiro movie Meet The Parents?

    Can we coin a new version “The circle of distrust”?

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

  31. oh noes! The poor nations wont get their free handouts “to combat climate change”. I put quotes around that because we all know what this is really all about and why they poor nations support this world socialist government in a enviornmental movement clothing.

  32. 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 ….

  33. 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.

  34. Now it’s not about climate, data, or long-term temperature trends.

    It’s the art of politics, compromise, and establishing a new paradigm. It’s simple, really. Tell U.S. voters that the system is “rigged” in their favor and get them to then accept some external control of the U.S. What’s a little less sovereignty amongst friends? Once that new principle is in place, it’s just another little compromise to later improve the deal for the developing world and before you know it, there’s no sovereignty left to worry about.

  35. 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?

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

  37. “The Circle of Commitment”

    Sounds like a teenage suicide pact. In fact, it’s a Western suicide pact.

  38. The Great and Mighty Gore! (08:29:06) :

    “or children aren’t allowed air-rifles in Denmark.”

    This is Europe where of course children are not allowed such a dangerous weapon as an air rifle.

  39. This whole farce is a Western invention, an absolutely stupid, suicicdal one at that. Now, having promised gazillions of dollars to third world potentates, they pull the offer back :-)

  40. I think this sums it all up:

    Never on the field of scientific endevour have so many been duped by so few.

  41. Charlatans – Return.To.Unit!

    Back.Away.Slowly.From.The.Conference.Table.With.Hands.Up.Over.Your.Heads.Where.We.Can.All.See.Them!

    Take.The.First.Bicycle.Out.Of.Copenhagen – Walk.Swim.The.Rest.Of.The.Way.

    Do.Not.Stuff.Caviar.In.Your.Pockets.Before.You.Leave.

    Do.Not.Attempt.To.Repeat.This.Nonsense – EVER.

    Begone.NOW!

  42. 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.

  43. From Richard Black’s most recent blog comments

    “21. At 4:59pm on 08 Dec 2009, Richard Black (BBC) wrote:
    #3 Kamboshigh not sure why you call that “bad news”… also not sure how you get that figure from the UAH data. Assume you’re not cherry-picking from one very warm month to one very cold month? I’ll e-mail the profs and ask them – will post. ”

    reference – “3. At 3:16pm on 08 Dec 2009, Kamboshigh wrote:
    Richard hate to give you badnews but Dr.Roy Spencer published last week the UAH data for the period 2000-2009 shows a decline of -0.72 for the previous 108 months.”

  44. 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.

  45. “It effectively is the end of the UN process,” said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.

    Which means of course that there would be no need to properly investigate climategate and the input of the CRU to the IPCC process because the bandwagon will have effectively ‘moved on’…

  46. There really is something rotten in the state of Denmark! This whole sorry affair is morally and ethically bankrupt on every level.

  47. Sunfighter, the free handouts ($10B in upfront cash) are still on the table. But those are for the developing world’s elites to skim into various secret accounts, now, while condemning their people’s grandchildren to an energy titrated future.

  48. Colour me unsuprised.

    Not long ago, and unfortunately I lost the link the UN was grumbling about it’s existing climate adaptation/compensation/bribe fund being empty. Or not as full as it thought. Rich countries had ‘agreed’ to bung them some money to dole out to worthy causes..

    http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2366

    While the need for climate change adaptation funding is generally agreed to amount to hundreds of billions of US dollars, the UN fund set up for the purpose in 2008 currently holds just 18 million – not billion – US dollars.

    Ah, shame. Our fearless leader, Dr Brown proposed an £80bn fund to help fill the UN coffers. Then governments realised giving the UN control may not be best policy, and may not mean the money is spent wisely. Like on crop spraying helicopters that accidently didn’t have weapons mounts removed.

    So governments decided to keep control of the money and dole it out themselves, which seems to be an arrangement this new Copenhokum deal is trying to formalise. Looks green, but allows business as usual.

  49. An excerpt from the preamble:

    “The Parties recognize the urgency of addressing the need for enhanced action on adaptation to climate change. They are equally convinced that moving to a low-emission economy is an opportunity to promote continued economic growth and sustainable development in all countries recognizing that gender equality is essential in achieving sustainable development.”

    Hmmm … gender equality, eh? How does this fit into the overarching goal of reduction of the dreaded CO2 emissions? Oh, wait … I guess this must mean no more heavy-breathing, guys, otherwise the brave new world will not come to pass.

    Amazing, simply amazing.

  50. “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.”
    That baloon full of hot air is in the middle of City Hall Square in Copenhagen, Don’t make our gunlaws any worse than they already are…
    Soren

  51. I like the very last word in the document.

    Etc

    Says it ll really. This half baked nonsense deserves to be thrown into the compost long with it’s authors.

  52. 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.”

  53. Goreacle Report: Be happy we warned you that AGW, aka global warming, will kill you.
    …-

    “Calgary perilously snowed-in

    Residents fear road blockages in emergency

    CALGARY — Northeast Calgarians say their lives are in greater peril should another massive fire or health emergency happen on snowed-in streets littered with stuck vehicles.

    Saddletree Dr. N.E., facing a north open field with no shield from high winds, has been impassable since Friday.”

    http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/12/08/12077726-sun.html

  54. 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.

  55. Are you telling me that the entire political circus since Rio 1992 is just an elaborate facade to rebrand the World Bank’s lending policies whilst maintaining the status quo??

  56. “The US and Europe have been accused of employing underhand diplomatic tactics”

    The Chicago Way goes global.

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

  58. I guess we’ll hear that it was the Freemasons who leaked this. Freemasons working for the Russians.

    World Bank, hmmm I think Obama knows someone there?… Oh yes, his trusted advisor Paul Volker.

  59. 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]

  60. Denbo:

    “If they drafted such a document and yet left out China and India those countries would head for the door in a heartbeat. Unless of course they ARE named in the list of ‘rich countries’ or perhaps they are given a separate but equally juicy deal.”

    Very, very good point.

    Sean:

    Leakers might be Russians. Obama thought maybe he has them stupefied with his mere existence.

  61. Ever notice how a group beyond a certain size has trouble deciding which restaurant to go to for dinner and when to leave?

    Legislatures manage to get something done, but do so in groups run by a few parties.

    The only hope for COP-15 to get something done is to do something similar, and they’re sort of doing that – developed/developing/undeveloped, Carbon gorillas/gnats, etc, but I doubt there’s the organization to be effective.

    If people are coming you with non-starters like this, I’m encouraged that COP-15 will collapse into a mob of bureaucratic finger pointing (and maybe real fist fights). Of course, given the little reaction to a global tax on countries, perhaps people actually thought this might not be a non-starter.

    My compliments and thanks to whoever wrote this document.

  62. 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.

  63. “Hmmm … gender equality, eh? How does this fit into the overarching goal of reduction of the dreaded CO2 emissions? ”

    It doesn’t and this isn’t really about CO2 emissions. They are USING CO2 emissions and the fear they have generated surrounding CO2 emissions to further a much larger agenda. It isn’t really about CO2 at all but it is vital that the masses believe it is about CO2.

  64. Vincent:
    “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).

  65. Dieter (10:55:16)

    “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 irony to this whole road show is that the true believers still don’t have to prove their case. ”

    Bingo. The same preamble I noted earlier begins:

    “The Parties underline that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time and commit to a vigorous response through immediate ambitious national action and strengthened international cooperation with a view to limit global average temperature rise to a maximum of 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels. The Parties are convinced of the need to address
    climate change […]”

    The magic “2 degrees” appears only twice more in the document. So not only is the science “settled” (notwithstanding any “fog of uncertainty” – per Hulme in the WSJ of Dec. 2), for all intents and purposes, it’s now written in stone.

    And the foggy solution to the climate question steamroller just keeps rollin’ along.

  66. In Sweden, two of the largest newspapers online versions have picked this story up. One of them seems to have misinterpred the story though.

  67. I would like to express my gratitude to the brave IT people (the ones with the opportunities and abilities to do these leaks), who have risked their jobs (though hopefully they know how to cover their tracks), to bring these gems to light. Hail to the Unknown Geeks! They are truly the Heroes of our Brave New World. May they always have clean power, good backups, and bright blue LED lights.

    Hail the Geeks!

  68. The mechanism for the global government being created before our eyes. This allows the “rich nations” to produce more CO2. Hmmm, proves that they know that the AGW theory is a lie.

    They will tax and control the middle and working classes to the edge of extinction, whilst revelling in their own personal excess as before. This week sees a perfect example of this as they jet in to Copenhagen to lecture us on carbon emissions and telling us not to fly. When I have drastically reduced my personal carbon footprint and I have not flown once in the last 6 years, I object to the fact that the last 5 years of my reductions in carbon have been offset by one celebrity flying into Copenhagen, parking their jet in another country and being driven around in a stretch limo.

    This shows that by their behaviour they do not believe in AGW. If these high level delegates to Copenhagen do not even believe in it, why should I?

  69. 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.

  70. Wouldn’t surprise me if a backlash on this drives people towards strengthening-up the UN as the controller of all this stuff. That is what the UN wants, after all.

  71. 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).

  72. “The Parties recognize the urgency of addressing the need for enhanced action on adaptation to climate change. They are equally convinced that moving to a low-emission economy is an opportunity to promote continued economic growth and sustainable development in all countries recognizing that gender equality is essential in achieving sustainable development.”

    But what about the Unicorns!

  73. “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.

  74. 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).

  75. “They are equally convinced that moving to a low-emission economy is an opportunity to promote continued economic growth and sustainable development in all countries recognizing that gender equality is essential in achieving sustainable development.”

    Ha, proof it’s not the west or the developing countries driving the agenda, it’s the People’s Front of Judea.

  76. ..”and it’s too late baby now, it just too late, though we really did try to make it…”

    Oh nooooo….!!! It’s too late.

    Nothing is as it seems.

  77. AdderW,
    I think doubting how many of these threats have actually been made is a good thing.
    It would have been interesting to actually produce a few of the suspect e-mails.
    But somehow it is a consistent pattern that AGW promoters are shy about producing e-mails.
    As it seems more and more clear that the leaked e-mails, the code and the data are evidence of a major scam, I wonder how mad people whould get at the fraudsters?

  78. Oh no! Trouble in paradise again? This is just awful! “Circle of commitment”? Where is the Circle of Trust? Where is the love? Can’t they all just get along – perhaps a big group hug, and sing kumbaya, and toast marshmallows? I am just sick over this turn of events, sick I tell you. And yes, don’t forget the Unicorns. I need to go lie down now to recover from this huge disappointment.
    Can’t seem to find any popcorn lately. Seems to be a run on it.

  79. 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!

  80. 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. . . .

  81. And as the race is about to end, a dark horse suddenly appears from left field to steal the lead… Who will win, will it be the poor? the idealistic? the naive true believers?… or the rich and ruthless?…

    The horses stream down the final stretch…

  82. “leaked documents” …

    What, not “hacked”? Not “stolen”? Not “private” documents?

  83. Trev (13:20:23) :

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

    I’m impressed, a rather obscure, but apt cultural reference.

  84. 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 ! ! !

  85. Graeme From Melbourne (13:55:19) :

    Trev (13:20:23) :

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

    I’m impressed, a rather obscure, but apt cultural reference.

    ‘The whicker man’ comes to mind…

  86. Sean Peake (13:28:07) :

    It was the Judean Popular People’s Front… the People’s Front of Judea don’t have a clue

    Splitters!

  87. Well, someone over at American Thinker called AGW the new form of Western Imperialism.

    It is that on several levels, it establishes an aristocracy in all but name over the West, and constrains the developing world to permanent poverty.

    The dream of the Marxists who moved into environmentalism after the collapse of communism, realized.

  88. 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.

  89. As the guy with the hockey mask, The Humungus, said in Road Warrior

    … I have an honorable compromise. Just walk away. Give me your pump, the oil, the gasoline, and the whole compound, and I’ll spare your lives. Just walk away and we’ll give you a safe passageway in the wastelands. Just walk away and there will be an end to the horror.

  90. 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?

  91. Hacked email climate scientists receive death threats

    as an AGW skeptic, I, for one, call for a complete investigation and prosecution as appropriate.

    Having said that, I am willing to bet that we will never hear about the results of investigation, either because (i) there were no such threats to start with or (ii) the threats came from the climate alarmists, either to drum up sympathy/deflect attention or as a “do-not-get-caught” warning.

  92. 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”)

  93. 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.

  94. Wow.

    LOL

    I think if Marvel comics tried to sell that story as a heroes-genre evil conspiracy to be defeated by Superman…it would have been rejected as not being believable. You cannot make this stuff up.

  95. 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.

  96. Gary, Jerry, our ‘Dear Leader” certainly couldn’t come up with something like this, but his main ‘sponsor’ could. Look to the hedge funds.

  97. RC Saumarez (14:48:59) :

    Hansen contends, correctly, that cap and trade is ineffective. He is a proponent of a direct carbon tax.

  98. Inferring from the news, I have come to the conclusion that water is a very dangerous substance. There are several facts about water that have not been publicised

    1. Lots of people drown in it.

    2. It is a major factor in floods.

    3. In vapour form it is responsible for nearly 85% of greenhouse effects.

    4. In cold countries, it is the cause of damp conditions, leading to arthritis and other debilitating conditions.

    5. Water bourn diseases kills millions in the third world.

    Surely it is time for the EPA to designate water as a dangerous pollutant. We could also have a Maldives protocol to deal with a “tap and trade” policy.

  99. 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”)

    :-))

  100. For those of us having a hard time seeing the document on the Guardian site it is also purportedly available on Scribd:

    The first four pages match.

  101. The UN document is all about the more powerful nations making the decisions… but also the corrupt elites gaining total control.

    un-fccc-2009:
    38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:
    (a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.

    203. Expert review teams referred to in paragraphs 200–202 above shall be coordinated by the secretariat and shall be composed of experts selected from those nominated by Parties to the Convention and, as appropriate, by intergovernmental organizations, in accordance with guidance provided for this purpose by the Conference of the Parties.

    SO, Haiti et al., whom have ZERO experts to participate in the “Expert review teams”, are governed by those nations which do have the educated elite, from which to draw. Thus little, to no representation in determination of their energy production and usage.

    Does that make sense?

    Future thoughts stuff:
    49. [Nationally appropriate mitigation actions shall incorporate the development and diffusion of low greenhouse emitting technologies, particularly renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies.]
    50. [Nationally appropriate mitigation actions shall not include technologies that have adverse impacts on the environment, including, inter alia, nuclear power and large-scale hydro-electric power.]
    (no nuclear, no large hydro in Utopia)
    (also, the addition of lots of square brackets “[ ]”, without a list of options, does not mean there is not full intent to implement the content of the brackets.)

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

  103. Well if you are going to apportion the burden on a per capita basis; it should at least be factored by the GDP per person in each country.

    The US gets slammed for having 5% of the world’s population but emitting 25% of the pollution and using 25% of the world’s energy. So clearly we aren’t using nearly as much of the world energy as we should be; considering our GDP per capita. Give US more energy, and we’ll make more G&S (including food for countries unable to grow their own).

    Well in the first place when it comes to CO2 pollution; we aren’t even close to being the worst; we are in fact the only good guys since our net carbon emissions are negative (We’re a carbon sink; not a source).
    And maybe we should cut our GDP of total goods and services to the same level as the rest of the world’s average GDP per capita.

    That of course would include investments in our National defence; which we would limit to the defence of just OUR country; every body else can provide for their own national defence.

    You want to start playing a blame card; you are once again going to awaken a sleeping tiger.

    Do the words “criminally insane” seem to fit any of the blowhards who are running this scam in Copenhagen. They certainly fit a good number of unelected individuals in Washington DC, that neither the people nor the Constitution ever authorised to wield the tyrannical power they exude.

    The citizens elect a Congress empowered to make the laws of this country; We have never authorised them to delgate that law making power to any unelected person.

    If beurocrats, such as this greenie wacko dimwit who runs the EPA are going to dictate the law of the land; what on earth do we need a Congress for ? We don’t need them, do we ?

  104. 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%).

  105. In Norht American news the last few days, there’s been steady reports on the few spots warmer than normal. There was even coverage of some swamp land in Louisiana, the media reported the native peoples were being forced to move because of man made global warming.

    It continues to be a movement hell bent on selecting the data they report on. these news reports run like infomercials.

  106. I think Obama, et al, must be thinking, “I want AGW so I can tax people, not change my lifestyle. Let’s not get stupid about it.”

  107. Gender equality, you say? Try this for a thought balloon: gender equality … better educated women … lower fertility … depopulation. What better (or more benign) way to manage the alarming increase of third worlders with their noisy claims to parity at the world’s table? Plus a slam at Islam. A twofer!

  108. 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.

  109. 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!

  110. ShrNfr (09:29:05) :

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

    Not enough space & Too warm.

    I propose that recently mothballed SAC base in Alaska.

  111. 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?!

  112. 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.

  113. Steve (20:43:38) :
    ShrNfr (09:29:05) :

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

    >”Not enough space & Too warm.
    >”I propose that recently mothballed SAC base in Alaska.

    How about putting them up in a nice AGW heated igloo in polar bear territory? We can sell tickets to the Eskimos – heck, let ’em watch for free!

  114. 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.

  115. Benjamin (21:07:15) :

    So I’ve no idea what they mean by that. Then again, when did socialists ever make any sense?!

    One of the pressure groups at Hop’n’shaggin is ‘Women for Science’ who want more women amongst the higher echelons of climate scientists.

    The politicos and eurocrats are paying lip service to them so they don’t go home telling tales of drunkenness and debauchery.

    While I’m an equal opps kinda guy myself, I think the quality of people’s contribution to science should determine their status, rather then some kind of bean counting exercise.

  116. 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.

  117. “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) .”

    Which in turn reports to their vegetarian overlords :-)

  118. I thought that the rules said that documents produced on the public purse had to carry the names of the authors.

  119. 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.

  120. Oh, and finally: the “Ring of Commitment”. Just how much does that sound like an X-Files conspiracy episode?

  121. 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:

  122. It’s at times like this I wish I’d taken a different career path. Can you imagine how much money the leaker at CRU is going to make when his name eventually becomes known? If he gets less than 10 million quid for the story then his agent (he’ll get an agent, of course he will: I wish I’d gone into the business so that I could get my ten percent) isn’t trying very hard.

    My Story: How I Saved the World by The Man Who Leaked The Truth About Climate Change.

    No, too long.

    How about ‘A Very Convenient Truth’?

    Ten million? He’ll make more money than JK Rowling in speaking engagements alone. It costs $1200 just to shake Gore’s fat paw. Everyone in the world should queue up to say thanks to the whistleblower, either this one or the one who finally puts the knife in.

    The plaudits of an astonished and grateful world… and ten million quid. Anyone at CRU/GISS/NOAA listening?

    JF

  123. 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.

  124. “Tony B (another one) (08:51:49) :

    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:

    “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.”

    Very Interesting – thanks for posting. I noticed that they gave the same treatment to the word “natural”. Apparently, as you pointed out, what they mean by “natural” and “correct” may not be what most people mean by those words. They need to get their models right, so that the “right” people always get the “right” answers.

  125. 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.

  126. We are greatly amused by this whole thing. When can we start holding these people to account? When do we start “High Crimes and Treason” proceedings?

Comments are closed.