Latest extortion attempt from Durban COP17: $1.6 Trillion

I failed to properly address the concern over islands sinking. The Messiah only has control over rising sea levels, not sinking land.
I agree that they have a right to live and we can’t decide their destiny, but neither can they decide our destiny and their destiny is their responsibility as is our destiny our responsibility.
That they have to be saved is a dependency welcomed by the omnipotent Messiah of the United States.
How many US$ trillions do you need. Its only printed paper.
———————————————————————————————————————
“You need to save us, the islands can’t sink. We have a right to live, you can’t decide our destiny. We will have to be saved,” Maldives climate negotiator Mohamed Aslam said.

We need to pull out of the U.N. before some liberal, gullible, know-it-all, inexperienced, nanny-state U.S. President decides we should actually do something the U.N. wants us to do, like spreading the wealth by forking over what he/she thinks is our “fair share” for world governance.
Oops.

For all you WUWTers who have been envying the denizens of Canada for the stance of our great leader, Stephen Harper, in refusing to sign on to the Durban nonsense, take consolation. The green energy policies of “Premier Dad” of Ontario, the sanctimonious Dalton McGuinty who has never heard of a progressive cause that he will turn down, are going to bankrupt the province and impoverish Ontarians. We’re right up there with California and the UK in terms of ridiculous, expensive and destructive renewable energy policies.
As Lawrence Solomon writes in today’s Financial Post:
“According to a peer-reviewed study earlier this year by University of Guelph economist Glenn Fox and retired banker Parker Gallant, two Energy Probe directors, by 2018 the average ratepayer’s annual electricity bill will exceed $4,000, making Ontario one of the highest-cost electricity jurisdictions in the developed world.”
Solomon, a long-time opponent of nuclear power, at least concedes that ‘renewables’ are a far worse monster in terms of money down the drain for rate-payers. See:
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/12/09/lawrence-solomon-the-green-goliath-takes-on-nuclear/
At least Harper, who is a keen ‘policy wonk’ and numbers man, won’t further drag us down by signing Canada on to this UN extortion scheme.

Joe Crawford says:
December 10, 2011 at 9:28 am
“It’s a rather sad statement about by the human race in general, but, “money, greed , power and control” are the driving factors in most things. The objective is to corral those and steer them into something useful for the general public without doing too much damage from the always present unintended consequences.”
Without additional clauses that specify individual liberties as inviolable rights of the individual against his government and the sovereignty of nation states you fall right into communism or its precursor the EU.

Remember, it’s no longer about Global Warming.
Er – Anthropogenic Global Warming.
Um – Climate Change?
Climate Uncertainty!
No, wait – it’s “Climate Justice”. That’s the current one, since all of the others have sorta failed.
That’s it. “Climate Justice” (which I first heard during the Cancun meeting last year, when there was record cold outside, and the delegates were pissed off because the “warming” wasn’t warm).
By this time next year, we’re going to be in “Global Cooling” again.

pat says:
December 10, 2011 at 10:14 am

“Someone keep Obama away from the checkbook.”

Oh, come on now. There is no possible way his account can be overdrawn. He’s got a lot of checks left to fill out in his checkbook.

Yep, just give us money and we will make all the bad molecules go away. Or maybe not, but at least we will try! But only if you hand over the money. If you don’t, your house will be razed by a hurricane, then your land will be dessicated by desert, and finally it will be flooded by the sea …. unless you hand over the money.

I think the plan is to give 1.6 trillion a year to the cleptocratic regimes of the “developing world” for which they can buy weapons, so that any war between developed world and the cleptocratic dictatorships takes an eternity to unfold and costs as much as WW II. (As part of the war preparations, the receivers will of course maintain that they spend all the money on planting trees.)
Has the added side benefit of depopulating the planet, and most important of all, investment possibilies.

Philip Foster says:
December 10, 2011 at 9:23 am
>>
I gather that a hoax document has been circulating at Durban… the BBC was taken in (no surprise there then) but admitted as much at lunchtime news today. I suggest we take care about all this.
>>
Apparently it is fake. According to the Guardian they got the type face and some “key details” wrong!
Frankly, I don’t care what frigging type face they use or whether their New World Government kicks in “in 2020” or “no later” than 2020.
This document is more important the Mein Kampf.

Perhaps the UN could be relocated to a place their influence can be most effective. I suggest the Eastern portion of Antarctica.

Louise says:
December 10, 2011 at 9:41 am

So you all think the word ‘invite’ actually means ‘demand’ – wow, I knew there were some differences between American and British English but I’d missed that one.

Louise, as one of the invitees, I can’t help feeling a little like one of these these “honored guests”.
http://www.pokerpages.com/poker-news/news/surprised-dutch-online-poker-players-are-being-invited-to-pay-taxes–31403.htm
I note the lead EU rep is Dutch, so maybe it’s Dutch English we ought to be worried about.

If the UN gets the $1.6 million to stop the climate from changing will it also be able to command the tides, or will only Al Gore have that power?

The suggestion of 1.6tn here is pretty stupid , as stated, that is whole world mil budget not that of developing nations.
The issues here are serious enough not to need spurious exaggeration.

I’m confused as to how this budgeting process is going to work. One requirement of the draft document is that all countries cease any military spending. Then, they demand an amount of money equal to the world’s military spending. By their own process, they have demanded $0.
Or are they just expecting that no one will listen to their demand for cessation of warfare and spend the money anyway despite the treaty? That must be their expectation since their track record so far of stopping warfare is zero too.
Starting to be a lot of zeros in this scheme. That would also be the number of countries that are going to sign this piece of insanity and actually implement a single provision in it. ZERO.

What’s so great about Durban the city that they would put a conference there? The only thing lots of people associate with the city is the racist Jew Hating conference they held there a decade ago.

And the bad news is that next years feast is going to be held underwater on the once Maldive Islands, to much to ask 30,000 parasites to drown for a just cause!

You do the hokey pokey and that’s what it’s all about.
Money taken from the “wrong” people, and given to the “right” people with most of it sticking to the elite fingers in the middle.

Louise says:
December 10, 2011 at 9:41 am
“So you all think the word ‘invite’ actually means ‘demand’ – wow….”
47. The provision of the amount of funds to be made available annually to developing country Parties, which shall be equivalent to the budget that developed countries spend on defence, security, and warfare.
Now that’s a real “wow”, dearie.
But I suppose you also think the authors of Fast and Furious, Sheriff Eric “Hit Man” Holder, and Prince John Barack and his Commie Hoods are really Robinhood and his Merry Men battling to oppose confiscatory taxation? And that the Drug Cartels will send only their real dirty “laundry” back for La Raza and such to dry clean?
Geez, Louise, it’s no doubt only going to be a matter of time before you “Progressives” will be praising these total fakes as “John Wayne Cowboys”.

Philip Foster says:
December 10, 2011 at 9:23 am
‘I gather that a hoax document has been circulating at Durban’
Pretty much every document circulating at Durban is a hoax, as is the event itself.

David L. Hagen;
Annual cost estimation of all MDGs = $329 billion.
Global Military Spending in 2009 – $1.53 trillion>>>
Here’s the problem with that analysis. You are assuming that spending the $329 Billion would be effective. History shows that it will not. Billions upon billions have been poured into the poor nations of the earth in the form of aid and support of all sorts, and they remain poor nations, struggling in squalor. They will continue to do so until the dictatorships, theocracies, monarchies and totaly corrupt governments are gone. Until then, every penny of aid sent to those poor nations does nothing but prop up the regimes that are responsible for their people’s misery, and prolongs the agony of the people who suffer under them.

“corporate says:
December 10, 2011 at 10:41 am
Wonder whyat THIS mjeans ?
…… the creation of decent work and quality jobs in accordance with nationality
defined development priorities and strategies,..
Not nationally defined, but nationality defined prorities”
Isn’t that interesting. I think most people can speculate what is really meant.

tallbloke says: December 10, 2011 at 9:12 am: The EU has wasted over 1/4 billion Euro on propping up the european carbon market already. That cash could have rebuilt all coal fired generating plant with filters and reduced co2 emissions 30%.
Half that would have paid all of Portugal’s debt, IMF loans almost all included.

As the Durban talks near an end and delegates scramble to reach some agreement, here’s a list of some of the key things under negotiation:
1. Adaptation Fund (Money)
2. Clean Development Mechanism (Money)
3. Green Climate Fund (Money)
4. MRV: Measure, report and verify (Money)
5. MRV for developing nations (Money)
6. Technology Transfer (Money)
7. REDD (Money)
When Europeans arrived in America they had shovels, axes, seeds, plows, some draft animals and a willingness to work hard for what they wanted.
In less than 300 years their descendants (the Americans) had landed a man on the Moon, created the Internet and improved their standard of living through hard work and by using the abundant natural resources, including inexpensive energy.
The countries demanding money have shovels, axes, seeds, plows, some draft animals and …. the ability to ask for a free ride.
The people in North America had to work hard for More than 200 years to get to where they are today, and some people in some countries just want it all right away without the long hard work, and they think they can Guilt us in to giving it to them. Good luck with that.

I like the bit where it says “A low carbon society.” That equates to ‘death and non-developement’ Back to the caves!

Josualdo says:
December 10, 2011 at 11:39 am
“tallbloke says: December 10, 2011 at 9:12 am: The EU has wasted over 1/4 billion Euro on propping up the european carbon market already. That cash could have rebuilt all coal fired generating plant with filters and reduced co2 emissions 30%.
Half that would have paid all of Portugal’s debt, IMF loans almost all included.”
Josualdo, Portugal had an extremely green energy policy (as encouraged by Brussels/Berlin)… so part of the 1/4 bn EUR wasted ARE Portoguese debt now!

Why can’t the Maldives get the money they need the same way we do, borrow it from China?

crosspatch says:
December 10, 2011 at 10:25 am

“Someone keep Obama away from the checkbook.”
Funniest thing I heard was: “Please, nobody tell Obama what comes after ‘trillion’”

It would be “$Brazillion”; that’s why he thinks South America has so much money.

I’ve been following the tweets. We are at a pretty dangerous stage. The delegates are so tired and so ready to get out of town that they will likely sign anything. That means that whatever goes in that final document will not likely be read carefully.
Look for something being slipped into that document that hasn’t been discussed.

There’s a two word response for this, but the inappropriate language would get me banned.

Number 1: Dr Evil do you expect them to pay that sort of money?
Dr. Evil: No Number 1, I expect them to Die!! Mwaahahahaha!

What financial institutions are behind this scheme?

DirkH says: December 10, 2011 at 12:12 pm:
Josualdo says: December 10, 2011 at 11:39 am:
“tallbloke says: December 10, 2011 at 9:12 am: The EU has wasted over 1/4 billion Euro on propping up the european carbon market already. That cash could have rebuilt all coal fired generating plant with filters and reduced co2 emissions 30%.
Half that would have paid all of Portugal’s debt, IMF loans almost all included.”
Josualdo, Portugal had an extremely green energy policy (as encouraged by Brussels/Berlin)… so part of the 1/4 bn EUR wasted ARE Portoguese debt now!
I’m regrettably pretty much aware of that… Machiavellian, isn’t it? And now we’ll have to keep subsidizing the renewables energy production from our personal pockets — the new Economy Minister clearly meant to stop the subsidies (he wrote about that more than once as a “must be”), but it seems the contracts are absolutely cast in steel, like so many other ruinous ones (public-private initiatives for instance). In a single year, we were done for the next 30.

“You need to save us, the islands can’t sink. We have a right to live, you can’t decide our destiny. We will have to be saved,” Maldives climate negotiator Mohamed Aslam said.
–
Get real Maldives! If anything you need dirt & sand, not dollars!
Buy your own cranes from those hundreds of millions of tourist dollars.
Dig. The ocean floors are huge and will recover.

[REPLY: Try looking a little harder. Your first post got through just fine. Gonna apologize now? -REP]
Oops – sorry, I missed that. So, apparently, did everyone else, as the dudgeon here continues to rise despite the likelihood that the subject document is a hoax.
[REPLY: What you also missed is that the document under discussion came from the UN’s own website here. -REP]

They just jumped the shark, shark with frikkin lasers!

What is the combined annual budget of all the NGOs present in Durban and all of their associated NGOs?
THAT is the reason we are having economic problems. That amount to billions of dollars being spent that produces NOTHING. How much did Spain and Portugal spend on “green” energy? What if they had all of that money back to do something actually productive … such as maybe leaving it in the pockets of their taxpayers?

MikeN
I lived in Durban for 16 years – A really great place!
Please don’t let your ignorance dominate!
But if I still lived there, I guess I would be as disgusted as you are.

“crosspatch says:
December 10, 2011 at 12:58 pm
“What financial institutions are behind this scheme?”
The UN *IS* a financial scheme!”
What’s the bet a large percentage of 1.6 Trillion $$$ will be the new budget for the ‘Enforcers’. The UN Global ECO-Green Police?
Cheap Trick’s song ‘Dream Police’ will have to be slightly re written and retitled the “Green Police”. With all the propaganda and crap from the UN.
The Green police, they live inside of my head.
The Green police, they come to me in my bed.
The Green police, they’re coming to arrest me, oh no.

Curiousgeorge says:
December 10, 2011 at 3:04 pm
Anjali Appadurai, a student at the College of the Atlantic in Bar Harbor, Maine, addressed the conference on behalf of youth delegates. “ANJALI APPADURAI: I speak for more than half the world’s population. ” http://www.democracynow.org/2011/12/9/get_it_done_urging_climate_justice
Really? An obscure student from an obscure college in an obscure state (currently frozen solid, btw) speaks for 3.5 billion people? What mind boggling arrogance!

Unless someone puts their feet down really hard and really soon, we will have ‘1984’ on our hands and children with green uniforms …

The excuse for wanting our money, trillions of it, is because, supposedly, we, the people of the industrialised countries, are causing oceans to rise, temperatures to soar, amd therefore, those tiny little countries, and some big ones too, will suffer because of our industrious character, inventive genius and general talents that make us capable of raising our standard of living in such a way as to double our expected life span from 40 years to 80 years, not dying of the cold and common colds and simple infections, being well nourished, clothed and having machines doing the otherwise back-breaking manual work for us that my grand father and his ancestors had to do for a living with their bare hands. Now, all this technology has been transferred to these good-for-nothing peoples of these back-ward countries FOR FREE, so that they would be able to drive SUV’s, live to a venerable old age of 85 years, eat meat and driink beer, and they want to get their hands in my pocket so that they would be able to have all this WITHOUT EVER DOING ANYTHING TO EARN IT. Just like the sociailists want to partake of my money in the form of a ‘dole’ and other excuses, now, the people of Vanuatu, voodooland and Venezuela (even if the latter is drowning in black gold) want trillions of dollars from those people who saved them from abject poverty and death by famine/plagues/tyranny.
What the industrialised countires (the descriptor ‘Industrious Countries’ would be a truer one) should do is ask these good-for-nothings to pay us for everything we have given them for freethese last 200 years. And I bl**dy mean it.

According to Monckton, those trillions of dollars would not go direct to the ‘suffering’ nations, but straight to the UN coffers for them to distribute. But distribute among whom? How much of that money would really reach the drowning vanuatans. Of course, since the vanuatans will not actually drown, they will not get any of those trillions. There lies the scam.

Man, you gotta read the twitter feed from #cop17 Marxists gone nuts.

1,600,000,000,000
The average number of air molecules you have to count before you find the first CO2.

Jimmy Haigh says: December 10, 2011 at 4:22 pm
“1,600,000,000,000 … The average number of air molecules you have to count before you find the first CO2.”
You have made a slight mistake.
390 ppm equals to one CO2 molecule among 2,564 air molecules.

Dumb-: Could it be PeterT has not bothered to notice that the document comes straight from the UN web site?
Dumber-: You know, just when I think no one can get any dumber…you go and totally redeem yourself by pointing out the obvious!

But you guys keep on telling me we already spends trillions on AGW.
But now it turns out 1.6 trillion is the total military expenditure of the entire developed world.
Any body seen the establishment of an Eco corps equivalent in size to the usa military, which seems to have a major military base in every major town. Or are you hiding it in area 51?
Nope no sign of them. Which must mean that every one of you who pulls trillions of AGW out of thin air is not particularly skeptical.

FOIA File structure seen as DOS file structure.
SUB Directory REDACTED.
CD/ redacted
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=REDACTED
DIR
—
Thu, 9 Oct 2008 6:56:17 am
0058.txt- Ralf
0058.txt-
0058.txt:[[[redacted: reference]]]
0058.txt-
0058.txt- Finally, might I ask that you note and then erase this email. I have found that recent
—
OPEN 0058.txt-
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=0058.txt&search=REDACTED
“
date: Thu Oct 9 17:56:17 2008
from: Keith Briffa
subject: Re: Tom Giverin – IN STRICT CONFIDENCE
to: “Toumi, Ralf”
Ralf
[[[redacted: reference]]]
Finally, might I ask that you note and then erase this email. I have found that recent
enquiries under the Freedom of Information Act, or Data Protection Act, can become
considerable time sinks , or the basis of some inconvenient subsequent distractions.
with best wishes
Keith
At 12:38 09/10/2008, you wrote:
Dear Keith,
Tom has applied to do a PhD with me (probably mesoscale modelling). Could you please
give me a reference for him. In particular I would be interested to know if you would
take him in your group (and why you think he is still available; which is good for
me…, but I always worry at this time of year).
Best wishes,
Ralf
Professor Ralf Toumi
Department of Physics
Imperial College
London SW7 2AZ
UK
Rm. H713 (Huxley Building)
Telephone: + 44 (0) ???
Fax: + 44 (0) ???
email: [1]???@imperial.ac.uk
Web: [2]http://www.sp.ph.ic.ac.uk/~rtoumi/
—
Professor Keith Briffa,
Climatic Research Unit
University of East Anglia
Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.
Phone: +4 ???-1603-593909
Fax: +4 ???-1603-507784
[3]http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/
Open — it is also a filename, + = space key seen on FOIA Grepper.
DIR
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=+–
“### CANNOT PARSE DATE ###
0876437553.txt-Sounds like you guys have been busy doing good things for the cause.
0876437553.txt-
0876437553.txt:I would like to weigh in on two important questions —
0876437553.txt-“
0876437553.txt:I would like to weigh in on two important questions —
0876437553 = UNIX time stamp
Open 0876437553.txt
“From: Joseph Alcamo
To: ???@uea.ac.uk, ???@rivm.nl
Subject: Timing, Distribution of the Statement
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:52:33 0100
Reply-to: ???@usf.uni-kassel.de
Mike, Rob,
Sounds like you guys have been busy doing good things for the cause.
I would like to weigh in on two important questions —
Distribution for Endorsements —
I am very strongly in favor of as wide and rapid a distribution as
possible for endorsements. I think the only thing that counts is
numbers. The media is going to say “1000 scientists signed” or “1500
signed”. No one is going to check if it is 600 with PhDs versus 2000
without. They will mention the prominent ones, but that is a
different story.
Conclusion — Forget the screening, forget asking
them about their last publication (most will ignore you.) Get those
names!
Timing — I feel strongly that the week of 24 November is too late.
1. We wanted to announce the Statement in the period when there was
a sag in related news, but in the week before Kyoto we should expect
that we will have to crowd out many other articles about climate.
2. If the Statement comes out just a few days before Kyoto I am
afraid that the delegates who we want to influence will not have any
time to pay attention to it. We should give them a few weeks to hear
about it.
3. If Greenpeace is having an event the week before, we should have
it a week before them so that they and other NGOs can further spread
the word about the Statement. On the other hand, it wouldn’t be so
bad to release the Statement in the same week, but on a
diffeent day. The media might enjoy hearing the message from two
very different directions.
Conclusion — I suggest the week of 10 November, or the week of 17
November at the latest.
Mike — I have no organized email list that could begin to compete
with the list you can get from the Dutch. But I am still
willing to send you what I have, if you wish.
Best wishes,
Joe Alcamo
—————————————————-
Prof. Dr. Joseph Alcamo, Director
Center for Environmental Systems Research
University of Kassel
Kurt Wolters Strasse 3
D-34109 Kassel
Germany”
There is still filename —————————————————-
DIR
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=+—————————————————-
Thu, 11 Jul 1996 1:07:13 pm
0837094033.txt-> NR4 7TJ
0837094033.txt-> UK
0837094033.txt:> —————————————————————————-
0837094033.txt->
0837094033.txt->
—
Open
0837094033.txt:> —————————————————————————-
“From: Alan Robock
To: Phil Jones
Subject: Re: your mail
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:07:13 -0400 (EDT)
Dear Phil,
It looks like you have found Baitoushan. Vol. 2 lists Kuwae as VEI 6 in
1452 +/- 10 AD. How accurate are your dates? By the way, Chris Newhall
thinks 1600 is the Parker volcano on Mindanao in the Philippines. He
hasn’t published that so far, as I know.
Could you please define “utter prat” for me? Sometimes I think we speak
the same language, and sometimes I’m not so sure.
I’m doing fine. We have a new building with nice new offices. I’m going
to Australia next week with Sherri and Danny, and after the meeting, will
visit Cairns, Adelaide, and New Zealand. I’m looking forward to skiing
on a volcano, if it stops erupting.
Alan
Prof. Alan Robock Phone: (301)???
Department of Meteorology Fax: (301)???
University of Maryland Email: ???@atmos.umd.edu
College Park, MD 20742 http://www.meto.umd.edu/~alan
On Thu, 11 Jul 1996, Phil Jones wrote:
> Alan,
> Thanks for the quick response. We’ll expect something from Melissa
> in the next few weeks. I also hope our copy of the 2cnd edition arrives
> soon. In our maximum latewood density reconstruction from the polar Urals
> to AD 914, the most anomalous summer is AD 1032. A lot of other volcano
> years are there with summers of -3 to -4 sigma such as 1816,1601,1783 and
> 1453 (I think this later one is Kuwae that is being found in the Ice Cores
> in the Antarctic. However 1032 is 6 sigma and it may be the Baitoushan
> event which you say is 1010 +/- 50 years or the Billy Mitchell event.
>
> I hope all’s well with you.
>
> Cheers
> Phil
>
> PS Britain seems to have found it’s Pat Michaels/Fred Singer/Bob Balling/
> Dick Lindzen. Our population is only 25 % of yours so we only get 1 for
> every 4 you have. His name in case you should come across him is
> Piers Corbyn. He is nowhere near as good as a couple of yours and he’s
> an utter prat but he’s getting a lot of air time at the moment. For his
> day job he teaches physics and astronomy at a University and he predicts
> the weather from solar phenomena. He bets on his predictions months
> ahead for what will happen in Britain. He now believes he knows all
> there is to know about the global warming issue. He’s not all bad as
> he doesn’t have much confidence in nuclear-power safety. Always says
> that at the begining of his interviews to show he’s not all bad !
>
> Cheers Again
>
> Phil
> Dr Phil Jones
> Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 ???
> School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 ???
> Norwich Email ???@uea.ac.uk
> NR4 7TJ
> UK
> —————————————————————————-
>
>”
This is an example file path, and seems to be endless.
I think that the master file is still in CRU computer systems,
so we have to sort files like I did.
Ilkka.

The latest from the AP:

http://news.yahoo.com/climate-deal-approval-un-conference-190231003.html;_ylt=AtyRQ0hfnZocQSnCozLpfbGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNsampwMmZxBG1pdANUb3BTdG9yeSBGUARwa2cDODAyYjRhNmQtZmVkNC0zNmIwLWI3MzItMDcxNGEzZWUwY2RiBHBvcwM1BHNlYwN0b3Bfc3RvcnkEdmVyAzBjYzkwZTI2LTIzOTAtMTFlMS05ZGQyLTc4ZTdkMTVkMWM2NA–;_ylg=X3oDMTFvdnRqYzJoBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANob21lBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25zBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3

The package must be approved by consensus, and no vote will be called.

How do you know you have a consensus if no vote is taken?

Leon Brozyna says:
December 10, 2011 at 5:20 pm
ow do you know you have a consensus if no vote is taken?

‘Consensus’ is a term-of-art in climate science. In normal parlance, ‘consensus’ means unanimous support. In climate science, ‘consensus’ means support only from those people who already agree with a particular point of view. Those who disagree are, by definition, explicitly excluded from the consensus. So what this really mean is that the only people who get to decide what’s in the agreement are those who already agree with what’s in the agreement. Everyone else is definitionally excluded.

LazyTeenager;
The manner in which the funds are administered is undefined.There are many alternatives by which the funds could be administered and which do not involve the UN in any way.
You are making an assumption.>>>
So, you’re suggesting that the UN is considering collecting $1.3 Trillion from rich countries to give to poor countries, proposing a “world climate court” to enforce the transfer, and it supposed to happen without any UN involvement? Who runs the court? Who collects the money? Who distributes the money? On what basis? According to what rules? Who oversees the whole thing?
Could you propose a plausible mechanism to implement such a scheme that is not centrally run? Can you propose a plausible mechanism that would accomplish these goals without UN involvement and over sight? Can you explain why the UN would propose a vast, wide ranging system based on their rules, their proposals, and their enforcement, which they would then walk away from running?
Who would they turn it over to? Zimbabwe?

Rothbard saw things clearly. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothbard
“Rothbard advocated abolition of coercive government control of society and the economy. He considered the monopoly force of government the greatest danger to liberty and the long-term well-being of the populace, labeling the State as nothing but a “gang of thieves writ large”—the locus of the most immoral, grasping and unscrupulous individuals in any society.[6][7][8][9]
Rothbard concluded that all services provided by monopoly governments could be provided more efficiently by the private sector. He viewed many regulations and laws ostensibly promulgated for the “public interest” as self-interested power grabs by scheming government bureaucrats engaging in dangerously unfettered self-aggrandizement, as they were not subject to market disciplines.”

LazyTeenager says:
December 10, 2011 at 5:02 pm
Lazy, quit babbling.

“Alex the skeptic says:
December 10, 2011 at 3:34 pm
According to Monckton, those trillions of dollars would not go direct to the ‘suffering’ nations, but straight to the UN coffers for them to distribute”
Yeah that’s also a big problem and a rort.
The UN has already come under fire / criticized for returning upto 90% of socalled AID Money back into their own coffers as ADMIN Fees. As in the case of E.Timor from memory as an example.

LazyTeenager says:
December 10, 2011 at 5:33 pm
More babbling Lazy, no one said it was signed or agreed on. The unmitagated gall to even write such an inane proposal is beyond parody. (That you attempt to make it sound reasonable is also rather sad.)

Leon Brozyna says:
December 10, 2011 at 5:20 pm
The latest update from my earlier post …
Durban has kicked the can … Kyoto extended for five years … and they’ve agreed to come to a new agreement by 2020 … which means, more conferences in exotic locales for the coming decade, all on the taxpayers’ dime. What a racket!

Jimmy Haigh says:
December 10, 2011 at 4:22 pm
1,600,000,000,000
The average number of air molecules you have to count before you find the first CO2.
———————
Sure. Now taking the number of CO2 molecules per cubic meter into account ,and the cross-sectional area of each CO2 molecule, calculated the distance travel by an IR photon before it hits a CO2 molecule.
Then explain why the few millimeters you get for the answer is too short by a factor of a thousand.
If you can’t do all of that successfully you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Kyoto extended for 5 years? What does that mean?
United States was never in.
China, Russia, India, Brazil all signed up on the proviso they didn’t have to do anything.
Europe is teetering on the edge of financial ruin and could very well meet their Kyoto goals through economic collapse.
Zimbabwe, Maldives, etc etc signed up on the proviso that they GET money, that nobody is going to actually give them.
Japan says they are out.
Canada will shortly announce that they are out.
Japan and Canada? The new leaders of the free world?

What if you can’t collect the $1.6 and you have to do it with force? You’d only have a few days before raising the army would offset the bill and there would be nothing left to collect. What a freaking crock. I agree with Lord Monckton. There are several excellent reasons for seeking the end of war, but this is stupid.

David says:
December 10, 2011 at 6:00 pm
LazyTeenager says:
December 10, 2011 at 5:33 pm
More babbling Lazy, no one said it was signed or agreed on. The unmitagated gall to even write such an inane proposal is beyond parody. (That you attempt to make it sound reasonable is also rather sad.)
——————
An implausible unsigned climate treaty, that has proposed expenditures equal to total developed countries military budgets, is causing the WUWT readership to freak out. I would say my babbling is something you need more of.
I can’t imagine what you guys thought was going to happen if the USA refused to agree to the expenditure part of this treaty, Maybe the UN was going to threaten to nuke one major city at a time until you agreed to cough up the trillions?
And now that the treaty is out what does it actually say. Cough up trillions or else?

Circa 1981
Alarmist: The world is running out of oil! We must cut back! We must develop alternative energy sources! Like wind mills!
Realist: Uhm…we developed oil because wind mills don’t work very well. How about nuclear?
Alarmist: No way! We’ll blow ourselves up! Windmills!
Circa 2011
Alarmist: We’re burning too much of the oil we didn’t run out of, and the planet is going to spontaneously combust! We must cut back! We must develop alternative energy sources! Like wind mills!
Realist: Uhm… we developed oil because wind mills didn’t work very well. How about nuclear?
Alarmist: No way! We’ll blow ourselves up! Windmills!
Circa 2041
Alarmist: There’s an ice age coming!
Realist: Aren’t you the same idiot I proposed nuclear power to in 1981 and 2011?
Alarmist: No way! We’ll blow ourselves up! Windmills!

If the idiots at Durban have agreed to extend Kyoto another 5 years I wonder if this will cause the Climategate email guy to release more emails –perhaps those related to the politicians in the middle of it ???

They are just whistling to cheer themselves up if they imagine that China or India will cripple their economic development, whatever they sign.
Although, on past performance, China and India will do rather well out of Kyoto and its subsidiaries. They have raked in many millions on the basis of phony ‘carbon credits’.
Who’d have thunk it? Nations of vast population with a cultural commitment to education might actually be smart enough to work out the angles on proposals put up by rich and flabby nations that are infected by guilt and self-loathing. They can see an opportunity like that coming from a mile off.
They can simultaneously claim to be requiring of funds, while providing the West with ‘indulgences’ like solar panels.
What’s not to like?
Either our diplomats have deteriorated significantly in quality, or their political masters have directed them to rush towards the cliff. Perhaps both.
Scary stuff.

Is it just me or does it sound like they are asking/telling us to hand over our weapons?
That’s what I see. Blatantly.
Kinda creepy, but seriously………..who the hell do they think they are?
It’s time to recycle that U.N. building and make a nice park, with some trees, kids playing. That would be sustainable.

With all that money the UN could increase their take home pay by TEN times with hardly a dent in the balance, then give a good amount to their friends the African Leaders as a personal gift and still have change for COP 18.

SionedL says:
December 10, 2011 at 11:02 am
To Louise: Instead of looking up ‘invite’ and ‘demand’ in your Oxford dictionary, check the history of political speak. Words have whatever meaning they want on any given day. If they can convince you to sign onto a plan today with the word ‘invite’, tomorrow that ‘invite’ becomes a ‘demand’ and the day after ‘coercion’, you want corn? wheat? oil?, then you must ‘voluntarily’ ……and the day after that it is a crime against humanity.
—————-
Louis says:
December 10, 2011 at 11:07 am
Louise says:
December 10, 2011 at 9:41 am
“So you all think the word ‘invite’ actually means ‘demand’ – wow, I knew there were some differences between American and British English but I’d missed that one.”
—
The “invite” part only applies to submitting “information on plans to increase their financial contributions”. It’s like when the IRS invites me to submit a tax return every year. I can ignore the request to send in my tax forms but that won’t stop them from demanding their money anyway. There isn’t a global IRS, yet, but the elitists in Durban have already drafted plans to create one.
You may consider your power bill an “invitation” to pay but, where I live, the power gets shut off if I refuse to pay. So, to me, it’s a “demand”. I don’t have the option to ignore the taxes and fees added on to my power bill and pay for just the electricity I use, do you? If Durban gets its way, their extortion money will be added on to your power bill, your grocery bill, your tax bill, and anything else they can get their hands on. In other words, “invite” is newspeak for “demand” in its Durban context.
————-
David L. Hagen says:
December 10, 2011 at 11:24 am
Louise: Re: “So you all think the word ‘invite’ actually means ‘demand’”
Please evaluate the grammar of para 47 “to be made available” and “shall be”
funds to be made available annually to developing country Parties, which shall be equivalent to the budget that developed countries spend on defence, security, and warfare.
e.g. Merriam-Webster definition of shall includes:
b —used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory – “it shall be unlawful to carry firearms”
—————————-
Yes,it’s legalese in company speak. Against our human rights, Common Law, etc., for anyone to demand such a thing, so by invitation only, for example, Americans are invited to fill in their IRS forms and pay taxes.
The tricky bit is that they assume that acknowledgement of the company is de facto recognition of contract between you and said company. For example again IRS, by putting your signature on the request for your money and sending it back saying you’re not going to pay, the private company IRS holds that you have acknowledged that you have a contract with them and so should be paying.
The wording in these documents are of like ilk – it has to be an invitation to establish a contract, a demand would would organised crime in Common Law, natural law, US Constitution, etc., and demanding money with menaces if penalties are imposed for non-compliance.
The Brits spread the concept of Common Law to US and Commonwealth, but knowledge of it is being “educated” out of us..
This is the language of corporations. In Britain the legal system is a corporation for example, if you don’t have a contract with it it has no jurisdiction over you. For another example, MP’s are registered as corporations, they trade as such. Corporations exist to make money.
Parliamentary acts, statutes, are “legal” in the corporation speak, but cannot usurp your natural Common Law rights, they can only do this by getting your agreement, establishing a contract with you.
They think they have their arses covered by this, but, since this is not clearly explained and these ‘legal shalls’ presented as if actually lawful, it is still fraud. For example in Britain, by registering your car you establish a contract with the corporation running this and so required to abide by its rules, one of which is that by registering your car you give up ownership of it to the corporation. That’s how they can claim that it is ‘legal’ to take away and trash your car for non-payment of road tax, which would be theft and destruction of one’s property in Common Law. The legalese language deliberately confuses.
Any contract established by such subterfuge is a con, therefore automatically unlawful. You don’t have to agree to pay the private company the IRS any of your money.. The problem is that if you get sucked into being taken to court for non-payment, the jury most likely won’t understand this, and judges, being part of the system, direct juries to find for the corporation.
There’s been quite a lot of interest in various groups making a stand against these corporations masquerading as lawfully entitled to steal your money.., but, it seems to me what is actually necessary is to remind everyone of their common law, human, natural, rights and education in the language of coroporation speak – the Brits need to get back Common Law teaching and the Americans insist on their Constitutional rights. This is what we need spread across the world, contrast say for example Napoleonic law, and that it exists at all is still being systematically air brushed out by the meme “democracy” – majority voting doesn’t make something lawful, a democratic tyranny disturbing your peace, threatening you with punishment for not complying with its edicts, is unlawful.

David says:
December 10, 2011 at 6:00 pm
LazyTeenager says:
December 10, 2011 at 5:33 pm
More babbling Lazy, no one said it was signed or agreed on. The unmitagated gall to even write such an inane proposal is beyond parody. (That you attempt to make it sound reasonable is also rather sad.)
——————
“”An implausible unsigned climate treaty, that has proposed expenditures equal to total developed countries military budgets, is causing the WUWT readership to freak out. I would say my babbling is something you need more of.
I can’t imagine what you guys thought was going to happen if the USA refused to agree to the expenditure part of this treaty, Maybe the UN was going to threaten to nuke one major city at a time until you agreed to cough up the trillions
And now that the treaty is out what does it actually say. Cough up trillions or else?””
Lazy; why would we need more of your babbling, the comments you mock were on how insane the mind set was of thousands of people being flown, at taxpayers expense, to write an asinine treaty that would create world war three if implemented. Many of the same posters noted it would not fly. Your last sentance, “And now that the treaty is out what does it actually say. Cough up trillions or else?” No Lazy, It does not, and no one articulated your strawman; the treaty sounds like a treaty to keep working towards a new treaty; it is a sick joke fully worthy of all the ridcule heaped on it here.
However, the damage done by the CAGW panic (Which you attempt to promote) is far greater then the cost of these imbiciles travling around the world to promote inane proposals.. It is the hundreds of billions, if not trillions all ready spent, wasted on carbon trading, wind and solar mandates , wasted on yet one more “the frogs are getting bigger or smaller due to CO2 study”; all of which combine to make energy, all energy, far more expensive then it would be if sanity prevailed. This has contributed strongly to the worlds economic crisis, and prevented the only real solution to pull the world out of the economic crisis, inexpensive energy. So Lazy, these idiots you support have not gotton their way, but they have effectively destroyed the worlds economy, and your support is a part of the problem.
CO2 is not pollution, and thanks to the CO2 introduced in the atmosphere, all crops, worldwide, now grow 10% to 15% more food then they otherwise would. Without this we would be a world at war now. If population is your main concern, then alow those nations cheep energy, and watch them find the resources to curb real pollution and naturally, as happens in every nation that develops, reduce or stop their population growth.

“Sounds like the “informal groups” may be a strange lot.
Whether “to be presented to the Conference of the Parties” means it has to be taken seriously might depend on what became of it when it was presented.”
Yes they are a strange lot indeed. This informal document clearly reveals the true goal of all this.

David L. Hagen says:
December 11, 2011 at 10:06 am
Myrrh
Re: “Is the new out-of-sequence version the hoax??”
NO
See: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/awglca14/eng/l04.pdf
That is still posted by unfcc.int
Yes, I’ve seen that one, it’s a lot different from the 38 & 39 papers while appearing to be the same.., and, it’s in “English only” – I wonder if it’s just been put together to distance temporarily from the real 38/39 versions.
I don’t have my printer working at the moment, and can’t compare the versions easily.
I have never seen the hoax. Just read reports that it existed
Back to my first thought then, they have had such a backlash from the version 39 Monckton covers, possibly even at the conference itself, perhaps there are some who’ve never seen it writ large like this before, that simply putting out a rumour that there’s a fake doing the rounds creates enough confusion that some might now think the Monckton precis to be that, the original is off the wall enough.. They’ve just been a bit clever about it if they first produced the text with wrong dates, which the countries didn’t know about etc., which they could then say was the hoax they meant..
http://junkscience.com/2011/12/10/fake-text-derails-durban-talks/

“Fake text derails Durban talks
Posted on December 10, 2011 by Steve Milloy | 2 Comments
Now who would do something like that?
The Guardian reports:
A fake negotiating text has been circulated at the UN climate talks in Durban in what some delegates believe to be a deliberate attempt to derail the process, which is already in danger of failure because time is fast running out to clinch a deal.
The talks were scheduled to finish on Friday evening but ran on through the night, for the second night running, and will not finish until late afternoon on Saturday.
In what could have been a bizarre mistake, or else a ploy to sabotage the talks, the fake text was sent to delegates with a note that it had been drawn up by Mexico, the EU, the US and the Basic countries – Brazil, South Africa, India and China. It was dismissed by several of the countries named, who said it was different to their position on key details.
In particular, the text said work on a new climate agreement should start in the first half of 2012, when in fact the countries named want the new phase to begin immediately, and it said a new legal instrument should be adopted with effect from 2020, whereas the EU wants a text saying “no later than 2020″.”

A bit OT, a side step, while I was searching for Monckton Durban 2011 Mother Earth and finding lots of ‘UN eco-fascists’ mentions, I came across an idea I’ve not seen before, a movement to de-colonize America by the American Indians: http://unsettlingamerica.wordpress.com/2011/12/01/for-america-to-live-europe-must-die/ It’s about the mind-set of the European in the mix of marxism capitalism science contrasted with native views. I think he’s making too much of wood as renewable therefore good…, a through rose coloured glasses at his own history, but, how would one bring in, say, the cheap energy of coal to everyone without there being an industrial/capitalist/marxist system to extract it?