And here’s the stagecraft coming.
Here’s how the rest of it might go down.
By William M. Briggs Source: courtesy of Pajamas Media
First, some good news.
A lefty organization sent me an indignant press release stating that the Danish police have “aggressed on protesters outside the Bella Center.” By this, they mean that the agitants, who moments before were shouting “Push the police away!,” were physically held back from entering an already crowded room.
It is true that it is depressing to see the heretofore useful word aggression turned into another mouth-numbing verb. But it’s heartening to hear that a group of professional whiners were told “No.” True to form, when turned away the perpetually petulant started screaming “Rights! [1],” by which they mean, as they always do, “My desires, not yours.”
And can it be a coincidence that we now hear from Russia — the land where the Climategate emails were first posted — accusations that the Hadley Climate Research Unit fiddled Siberian temperature data [2]? The charge is that scientists only considered stations which showed warming, and tossed those which did not fit their preconceptions.
What makes this delicious is that the stations Hadley chose had large chunks of missing data, and the stations ignored had uninterrupted records. This makes sense: it’s easier to homogenize [3] data that isn’t there. The explanations to come will no doubt provide for some light comedy.
The best news of all are the rumors that “progress has been halting [4]” in Copenhagen. The word stalemate is showing up with increasing frequency in news reports.
Government ministers can’t agree on the best way to take money from their own citizens, give it to an opaque, above-the-law organization, and yet still control it; because, of course, with all that money comes power. Negotiators are skittish about how they can ensure that the money pledged will actually be paid into the pot, and if it does, who gets to dole out the funds. Everybody wants a piece of it, but nobody trusts anybody.
However, I believe this is only a spate of temporary sanity.
The forces of darkness will realize that some deal is better than no deal. Lord Monckton, on a guest appearance on the Glenn Beck program a month ago, had it right. He predicted the early stalemate, but said it would end at the last possible minute, after an all-hours marathon session:
From which the bureaucrats would emerge, their ties over their heads, where they will announce, “We’ve done it. We’ve come to an agreement.”
My money is on Viscount Monckton. The Russian revelations about data manipulation, like the rest of the Climategate story, will be resolutely ignored by negotiators. Some kind of real-money deal will emerge. There’s too much momentum and too much vanity on the line. The One himself will even appear on the icy slopes of Denmark. You simply cannot have so many celebrities and political will in one place, and expect them to concede defeat. It is just not in their nature.
But that’s an easy prediction. What about what comes after?
First, the greeny groups will smell blood in the water. They will use the Copenhagen deal, here in the U.S., to claim that cap and trade must be passed. They will say: “The world agrees something has to be done!” Weak-minded politicians — of which there is never a shortage — will find this argument convincing. Still, the best the greens will do this year will be a publicly stated “commitment” to “tackle the issue,” right after the new year, after the left secures its health care power grab. “You’re right, it’s devilishly important” will assuage some greenies, and will quiet them enough so that the Democrats can mount some sort of campaign counterattack in 2010.
Democrats know they’re going to lose a good chunk of seats by passing health care — they don’t want to start a riot by tacking on another tax so soon afterwards. They will wait to see if they lose their filibuster-proof majority. If so, they will be able to blame the failure of cap-and-trade legislation on “uncaring, denialist” Republicans.
Meanwhile, back at the UN, it will be broad smiles and CO2-emitting champagne toasts. “To humanity!” they will cry, but as they place their glasses on the salvers, not a few of them will twist their mustaches and think to themselves: “Money!”
Of which, it will be gradually revealed, some will have gone missing.
Shock! Horror! Who could possibly have known! It will, of course, have gone to brothers-in-law in various countries. Most organizations receiving our coerced largess will turn out to be “green consultancies,” of the kind that spend a ton of money (by hiring cousins and other familia) but produce nothing.
After a decade of global temperatures stubbornly refusing to play nice, and things turning out to be not nearly as bad as predicted, the Copenhagen-created program will not die.
No government created entity ever kicks off simply because it isn’t needed.
It will morph into an ossified, entrenched behemoth whose mission will, through time, quietly morph into “environmental justice.” Climate change, the original impetus, will have been long forgotten.
Place your bets now.
Pascvaks (07:42:21) :
How do you say Kool-Aid in Chinese? Oh well, if the kids today don’t care why should we
Just don´t worry, in these parties they invite tea…
Don’t you know that in English, “Any noun can be verbed” ? 😉
The core problem at the bottom of ‘a deal’ is that China is the country who has the money, and they don’t want to play. Right behind that is Russia, who knows the truth, and can likely be bribed with a big enough bribe, but not if China will not loan the USSA or UK the money with which to do the bribing.
So “the west” (i.e. the EU nameless machine, the UK, the USSA, and the ‘followers of the crown’ in Australia, New Zealand, Canada…) is supposed to pony up a Big Pot of money, but we don’t have it. The “willing to be bought” (i.e. Russia, India, et. al.) are lined up hands out demanding a BIG payout (having been lead to believe it is coming), and the “unwashed true believers” are ready for a lynching of a deal doesn’t happen because they think it will be the end of the world….
But the banker, China, doesn’t want to loan us the money. Even if we promise to pay it back some day… Because they have figured out we will borrow dollars at $1000/oz gold and $70/bbl oil and pay them back at $3000 / oz gold and $200/ bbl oil. And they would rather just go buy the gold and oil now…
(NOT speculation. China is inking deals all over the planet to buy resources and dump dollars. $200 B of US Treasuries swapped to Brazillian PBR Petrobras in exchange for 20 years of oil. Deals for BTU Peabody Wyoming coal to be hauled in Burlington Northern SantaFe trains. etc. BNS being bought by BRKA / BRKB. Ignore the “honey words” and look at contracts signed and rail car loadings…)
So whatever ‘deal’ they sign is toast. China is not a sap and will not play one. Russia is only in it for any money they get, then will walk away with the money and claim climategate shows things are ‘not kosher’ and resume selling oil, coal, gas, etc.
Yes, it’s only the curtain closing on ACT 1 of a 3 act play, and who knows what paper will be signed. But just remember, it is nothing more than “climate peace in our time” with them saying “I hold in my hand, this piece of paper, guaranteeing climate peace in our time!”… It will make great ridicule fodder later.
Democratism is coming. Be afraid, dictators. Be very afraid.
The Irony of a deal being done in a snowy -3C Copenhagen today is delicious. It just over a year since the UK parliament passed the climate change bill, on an equally snowy day which heralded the earliest snow in London for 70 years.
“street theater,” “a sort of Nuremberg rally” — Lord Monkton
The deal has already been done, and Copenhagen is just the “celebration of how green we all are,” apparently to involve the world in what appears like reality, when it’s all just cheep theatrics.
“Nothing is real in Copenhagen – not the temperature record, not the predictions, not the agenda, not the “solution”.”
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/putting_our_economy_in_the_hands_of_chavez_fans
That world is on the precipice of a new dark age is a far more realistic assessment than either global warming or cooling. One can only hope and pray for some miracle to save us, because it’s gone so far now that it is beyond the ability of any group or even nation to avert. G-d help us!
tallbloke (12:36:43) :
“The Irony of a deal being done in a snowy -3C Copenhagen today is delicious. It just over a year since the UK parliament passed the climate change bill, on an equally snowy day which heralded the earliest snow in London for 70 years.”
Ahhh, what delicious irony, said the goose to the marinade.
Being as we are in the stew, it’s no wonder we can appreciate it’s flavor. But when they get done cooking our goose, we’ll be a lot less able to appreciate it, I fear.
Pamela Gray (06:09:08) :
I voted for an idiot.
LOL
Stop beating yourself up.
The communists in #Copenhagen have no idea what killed their beloved treaty. Now is the time to expose the warmists ‘science.’ We have the momentum.
Pamela Gray (06:09:08) :
I voted for an idiot.
I’ve got that beat, I voted for Jimmy Carter. Obama’s closing in pretty fast, though.
Pamela Gray (06:09:08) :
I voted for an idiot.
But you have recognized that and *learned*.
“Snatch the pebble from my hand, Grass–”
*swoosh*
“–hopper. Dang.”
Alba (03:28:14) :
“It is true that it is depressing to see the heretofore useful word aggression turned into another mouth-numbing verb.”
Excellent point, sir, and I’m glad to see that somebody else is bothered about this trend to make nouns into verbs. eg. tasked. Give us back our nouns and let’s go back to using proper verbs.
It seems to be another aspect of the dumbing down of the language from the media/public relations/politicians.
Fowler, in Modern English Usage, under “Noun and verb accent, pronunciation, and spelling,” notes the practice of forming verbs from nouns but makes no objection to it.
Bill Bryson approves of it in his recent Made in America: An Informal History of the English language in the United States.
p. 18: “Turning nouns into verbs … gave the age such perennially useful innovations as to gossip (1590), to fuel (1592), to attest (1596), to inch (1599), to preside (1611), to surround (1616), and several score others.
pp. 72-73: “In the nineteenth cenetury, Americans … turned nouns into verbs. The list of American verb formations is all but endless: to interview, to bankroll, to highlight, to package, to panic, to audition, to curb, to bellyache, to demean, to progress, to corner, to endorse, to advocate, to splurge, to boast, to coast, to oppose, to demoralize, to placate, to donate, to peeve, to locate, to evoke, to rattle, to deed, to boom, to park, to sidestep, to hustle, to bank, to lynch, to ready, to service, to enthuse — all these, and many, many more are Americanisms without which the language clearly would be very much the poorer.
“The nineteenth century was, in short, our Elizabethan age, and the British hated us for it.”
=============
gtrip (02:34:16) :
“I have to wonder: If these people are so intelligent, why would they schedule a conference on global warming in Copenhagen in December? Have they never heard of Murphy’s Law”
It wasn’t just “in” December, but at a time that coincided with the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize. I’ve speculated that they took a long-shot chance that a Democrat would be elected president, whereupon they could give him a Peace Prize and then use his propinquity to the Copenhagen summit to tiddlywink him into attendance. If I were a convention-planner, I’d have done the same.
PS: Of course, that’s not to say that some verbed nouns like “to aggress” aren’t cringeworthy, just that the practice can’t be sweepingly condemned.