Climate Tyranny Avoids Scrutiny

Guest post by Alan Caruba

You likely did not read much, if anything, in the mainstream press about the climate change conference that was held in Doha, Qatar. The same applies to television and radio news. These are the folks who introduced the Kyoto Protocols in 1997 with the intention to reduce greenhouse gas emissions said to be causing global warming. The U.S. Senate unanimously rejected them in an exercise of good sense we don’t always associate with that august body.

COP18, shorthand for the Conference of Parties, brought together under the aegis of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), was especially devious. Thanks to the Committee for A Constructive Tomorrow those of us keeping an eye on these charlatans, intent on transferring billions from developed nations to those that have failed to keep pace, we learned on December 8th that “The negotiations here in Doha have gone into overtime.”

As reported by Craig Rucker, CFACT Executive Director, “After going until after 3 AM last night, negotiations resumed today. Negotiators have sprung a dangerous proposal on the conference at the 11th hour. This time they have inserted a ‘Loss & Damage Mechanism’ into the final text which would require developed countries like the U.S. to pay poor nations for climate damages supposedly resulting from extreme weather events.”

The conference ended on Friday and the last money grabbing gambit failed. It was time for the 7,000 “observers” and its delegates to go home, all knowing that even the Kyoto Protocols will end in 2014 and that COP18 was yet another monumental failure.

CFACT was founded in 1985 by Rucker and David Rothbard, both of whom believe strongly in the power of the market, combined with the applications of safe technologies, to offer practical solutions to many of the world’s pressing concerns. They were soon joined by leading scientists, academics, and policy leaders, along with thousands of citizens from around the nation. CFACT has been especially watchful of the many “global warming”, now “climate change”, claims put forth by the IPCC, attending its conferences and reporting from them, as well as challenging the absurd claims made during them.

It is essential to understand that scientific literature shows no link between recent extreme weather events like Hurricane Sandy and the bogus global warming. Indeed, the planet has been in a natural cooling cycle for sixteen years.

As to the weather, the best definition I ever heard was that it is best described as “chaos.”

Rucker reported that those controlling the COP18 “have instituted a ‘paperless’ policy, depriving delegates of daily programs and copies of negotiating instruments that keep them relatively informed.” The justification for this is the number of trees saved from becoming paper and, as of Saturday last, it was determined to be 217! As for the delegates’ carbon footprint, this policy totally ignores the emissions from their jet travel, their five-star hotels and restaurants, air conditioning, limousines, and the carbon dioxide they are all exhaling.

The delegates, if they could, would impose carbon taxes nation-by-nation and globally, but Chip Knappenberger, a leading “skeptic”, writing in MasterResource.org, asked “How much global warming will result from U.S. emissions over the course of this century and how much of that could be prevented by a carbon tax? These two questions have the same simple answer—virtually none. One or two tenths of a degree a century with or without a carbon tax makes the whole climate debate a peculiar exercise.”

There have been periods in the Earth’s history when there were far higher concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and the result was an abundance of vegetation. Lots of dinosaurs ate it and other dinosaurs ate them. There was an increase in CO2 during our present period on Earth that began when the last ice age ended about 11,500 years ago. The rise of agriculture allowed our ancestors to feed more and more humans and livestock, giving rise to the spread of civilization and it too contributed to an increase in CO2. Presumably, these are good things because increase of CO2 suggests that the next ice age has been delayed to some extent.

Meanwhile, back at COP18 what amounted to secret negotiations caused a lot of anger among delegates to the conference. Cathie Adams, president of the Texas Eagle Forum, at a CFACT press briefing told attendees that “in all her 17 years of attending U.N. climate gatherings there has never been this much difficulty getting up-to-date information or reluctance to accommodate informed public input into the process.”

As of this writing, it is unknown what the official U.S. response will be to the effort to get developed nations to ship bundles of cash to any undeveloped nation experiencing a hurricane, a typhoon, a blizzard, or any other “climate event.” In a cash-strapped nation about to “go over the fiscal cliff” did President Obama instruct U.S. delegates to go along with this absurd demand? Probably.

It is useful to know that Canada, Japan, and New Zealand have already rejected any participation in the agreements to come out of COP18.

One assumes that the European Union, as financially challenged as the U.S. and struggling under soaring renewable energy costs, would be of the same mind. Add to them China, Brazil, India, Indonesia and other emerging markets that need to grow their economies and which are dependent–like every other nation–on coal, oil, and natural gas. Mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions would be the kiss of death.

The U.S. is about to undergo this madness in the form of a deluge of Environmental Protection Agency carbon dioxide regulations that will strangle the economy and kill jobs. Unless the Congress can eliminate them via legislation, it will constitute a form of national suicide.

The United Nations isn’t just involved in climate treaties. It is seeking control over the worldwide Internet, the oceans of the world, gun control, and regulating the rights of parents to exercise control over their children’s health and wellbeing.

If successful, the U.N. will lead the world back to a new Dark Ages.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
65 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
RES
December 11, 2012 4:38 am

‘One assumes that the European Union, as financially challenged as the U.S. and struggling under soaring renewable energy costs, would be of the same mind.’
Don’t bet on it!
Spain is the world’s third largest provider of wind energy and it’s economy is a basket case:
The economy, which only emerged from the last recession at the end of 2010, has now contracted for five straight quarters, data from the National Statistics Institute showed on Tuesday.
The downturn has had a devastating impact on the job market where the unemployment rate hit a new high of 25.1pc between July and September.
Here in the UK the ignoramus Ed Davey is giving away £2 Billion of our taxes for overseas development of useless wind turbines whilst elderly citizens are unable to keep themselves warm during the winter because of soaring energy costs
http://windfarmaction.wordpress.com/2012/12/06/2-billion-giveaway-by-ed-davey/
The EU could not care less about individual nations as long as the orthodoxy of AGW is supported with vast sums of its citizen’s taxes. The EU is a dictatorship made up of unelected, unaccountable, faceless and witless bureaucrats’ who are hell bent of creating a United States of Europe akin to the old USSR.

jim2
December 11, 2012 4:53 am

All we need to do is look at Europe. The lazy pull down the productive, the productive can’t pull up the lazy. There are way too many lazy people.

Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001)
December 11, 2012 4:54 am

“COP18, shorthand for the Conference of Parties, brought together under the aegis of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), …”
The IPCC is guilty of many sins, but this is not one of them. Both the IPCC and the UNFCCC are “children” of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), promulgator of scary stories since 1972.
But there is certainly a long-standing “co-dependency” between the two: the UNFCCC pretends that its deliberations are “informed by” science (of the IPCCC) and the IPCC (whose chairman has declared that the UNFCCC is its “main client”) depends on the UNFCCC for its “make work” projects.
I haven’t looked at this year’s documents and “statements”; yet, but from my examination* of the Durban documentation last year, there’s very little to be said of the attention that the UNFCCC gives to the IPCC anyway. They seem to be far more concerned with “financial mechanisms”..
* Is the IPCC still relevant to UNFCCC?

SanityP
December 11, 2012 5:29 am

Has anyone got a copy of the actual COP18 “agreement”?

Ed Reid
December 11, 2012 5:31 am

Otter December 11, 2012 at 1:41 am,
That’s easy. The EPA ordered coal plant emissions to be reduced. The companies, “driven by greed’, decided to shut down the plants rather than invest in new control technology. They also failed to install, or contract for, sufficient non-emitting generating capacity to replace the capacity they shutdown. Therefore, the companies are responsible for the blackouts; and, by the way, for the increased rates as well.

RES
December 11, 2012 5:35 am

Just tried to submit a medium length reply, twice, and twice it appears to have disappeared into cyberspace.
‘One assumes that the European Union, as financially challenged as the U.S. and struggling under soaring renewable energy costs, would be of the same mind.’
Don’t bet on it!
Here in the UK the ignoramus Ed Davey is giving away £2 Billion of our taxes for overseas development of useless wind turbines whilst elderly citizens are unable to keep themselves warm during the winter because soaring energy prices
http://windfarmaction.wordpress.com/2012/12/06/2-billion-giveaway-by-ed-davey/
The EU could not care less about individual nations as long as the orthodoxy of AGW is supported with vast sums of its citizen’s taxes.
This is amply demonstrated with Spain being the world’s third largest provider of wind energy and it’s economy is a basket case:
The economy, which only emerged from the last recession at the end of 2010, has now contracted for five straight quarters, data from the National Statistics Institute showed on Tuesday.
The downturn has had a devastating impact on the job market where the unemployment rate hit a new high of 25.1pc between July and September
[Reply: Sorry your comments were lost. WordPress has been dropping a lot of comments lately. I suggest that you keep a copy of your post until you see it in the thread. — mod.]

David
December 11, 2012 5:36 am

I am looking for a copy of about ten or so quotes from these watermellon wacks concerning their desire to drastically reduce the worlds population. Does anyone have this?

David
December 11, 2012 6:03 am

For those of you of an American persuasion who are under the impression that the EU gets anything right..
Jose Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission, complained bitterly recently that people were ‘critisising’ the EU for wanting to increase its budget by 6.8% (all the while imposing austerity on the likes of Greece; Ireland; Italy and Portugal).
Him – unelected – complaining that us voters/citizens of the EU had the nerve to critisise the EU bureaucrats..
It is fast becoming the EUSSR…

Ed Fry
December 11, 2012 6:26 am

Ed Reid
That is rather twisted logic.
The companies are not obliged to provide goods or services if a profit cannot be generated (pardon the pun). They are under no requirement to subsidize the Green agenda, nor must they address reductions in generating capacity.
Even had they taken steps to replace lost generating capacity or had they invested in the technology to reduce emissions, electrical rates would still have increased, and likely even higher than they already are.
So, no. It is Obama and the EPA that are responsible, NOT the companies, no matter how much you want to twist it.

AnonyMoose
December 11, 2012 6:30 am

“all knowing that even the Kyoto Protocols will end in 2014”
That’s odd.
A couple of Reuters alarmist cheerleaders say: “The conference … agreed to extend the emissions-limiting Kyoto Protocol, which would have run out within weeks. … Now they have a 2015 deadline to get a new global, binding deal in place, to enter into force after the extension of Kyoto expires in 2020. For the first time, it would apply to rich and poor countries alike.”
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/12/09/us-climate-talks-process-idUKBRE8B808N20121209

Pamela Gray
December 11, 2012 7:02 am

Both sides of the political spectrum have at one time or another, tried to shove a stinkbug covered in sugar down the throats of individuals and states. My belief is that it is absolutely essential that each person, to their greatest capacity available to them, discern the unemotional facts and figures taken from their own inspection of raw data. It is also my opinion that to do so, each person must suspend their own proclivity towards emotion, even for their own side during this inspection. If they fail to do so, they are fated to the same role they hate so much in the opposition: championing the cause of shoving a stinkbug covered in sugar down the throats of individuals and states.

RES
December 11, 2012 7:16 am

David says:
December 11, 2012 at 5:36 am
I am looking for a copy of about ten or so quotes from these watermellon wacks concerning their desire to drastically reduce the worlds population. Does anyone have this?
David the Book “Watermelons: The Green Movement’s True Colors” by James Delingpole has many more that 10 quotes that are suitable

Owen in GA
December 11, 2012 7:38 am

@Ed Fry, I think Ed Reid was answering the question “How could they blame the energy companies for the coming blackouts?” I don’t think he was proposing how he thought about it, just how the average uninformed American was going to be propagandized into thinking about it. I can see Jay Carney at the White House Briefing Room with the candles and oil lamps going telling the White House press corps exactly that explanation for why this briefing is happening in the dark.. Of course it is never the edicts of the NOBLE government that cause the problems, it is those EVIL RICH CARBON FUEL people that are to blame. (do I need /sarc?)

MrE
December 11, 2012 8:26 am

CBC article claims predictions all true. Points to Nature article but no data. There is also an online survey.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity/2012/12/un-climate-change-projections-made-in-1990-coming-true.html

December 11, 2012 8:29 am

Michael Schaefer says:
December 10, 2012 at 10:46 pm
M. Nichopolis says:
December 10, 2012 at 10:01 pm
We don’t cotton to being told what to do by some leader in a far away city – never have, never will. As they say down south…

cotton = kowtow ?
“Cotton” as a verb is, somewhat surprisingly, directly derived from our old friend “cotton” the fabric, or, as the Oxford English Dictionary puts it, “the white fibrous substance, soft and downy like wool, which clothes the seeds of the cotton-plant.” The noun “cotton” is a very old word, entering English around 1286 from the Old French “coton,” which came in turn from the Arabic “qutun.”
To “cotton” meaning “to get along with” comes from the characteristics of cotton cloth. Cotton fabric is soft and fuzzy with a rich pile, and “to cotton” originally meant to work cotton or some other fabric such as wool so as to raise a nap or pile. This process is an important step in the finishing of fine cloth, and by the 16th century “cotton” was being used figuratively to mean “succeed” or “improve.” By the early 17th century, “cotton” was being used in a more general sense of “get along well together” or “work harmoniously,” and a bit later to mean “strike up a friendship.” The modern sense of “to become attached to” first appeared around 1805.
http://www.word-detective.com/

Ed Reid
December 11, 2012 8:40 am

Owen in GA December 11, 2012 at 7:38 am,
“No more calls; we have a winner.”
I liked you “visual”. Vaguely reminiscent of the Tim Worth / James Hansen “thermostat trick”. 🙂

Gail Combs
December 11, 2012 10:56 am

Ed Reid says:
December 11, 2012 at 5:31 am
Otter December 11, 2012 at 1:41 am,
That’s easy. The EPA ordered coal plant emissions to be reduced. The companies, “driven by greed’, decided to shut down the plants rather than invest in new control technology….
___________________________________
You for got to add a ‘new control technology’ THAT DOES NOT EXIST!

RichieP
December 11, 2012 11:07 am

Not really off topic but the Guardian is running a poll on “Should rich countries compensate poorer ones for the damage done by climate change?”. If you know the Guardian you know what answer they’re after. Please vote No here – four hours to go and it’s currently at 42% – Yes
58% – No . Please vote – only one click needed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/poll/2012/dec/09/rich-countries-compensate-damage-climate-change?CMP=twt_gu

Dan B
December 11, 2012 11:09 am

Otter says:
So, you want to know how they blame the power companies for blackouts? They’ve already done so, “failure to maintain the grid in the pursuit of investor gain”.

Zeke
December 11, 2012 11:22 am

Alan Caruba says: “The United Nations isn’t just involved in climate treaties. It is seeking control over the worldwide Internet…”
The UN’s The World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) meeting in Dubai is being held at a convenient location just across the bay from CoP18 Doha, and is now in session.
The House and Senate have passed the following unanimous resolutions:
“Concern over the ITU has inspired strong bipartisan opposition in the U.S. In August, the House of Representatives unanimously passed (414–0) H. Con. Res. 127, introduced by Representative Mary Bono Mack (R–CA), which endorsed the current multi-stakeholder governance model and urged the Administration to “clearly articulate…the consistent and unequivocal policy of the United States to promote a global Internet free from government control.”
Senator Marco Rubio (R–FL) introduced a similar version of this resolution (S. Con. Res. 50) that passed the Senate by unanimous consent on September 22.”
The European Parliament has also warned that control of the Internet must be stopped from falling into the hands of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). And if “unanimous” opposition is not enough to convince the free world of the danger, “anonymous” has taken credit for hacking computers in Dubai to block proceedings.

john robertson
December 11, 2012 11:34 am

Sure we should compensate the “poor” for the damage done by AGW.
Zero damage= Zero money.
And maybe a boot to the posterior of the middleman is in order with the cheque for $000000……

john robertson
December 11, 2012 11:36 am

On compensation ,we shall be seeking that from the UN, for the fraud they have and are committing

Gail Combs
December 11, 2012 11:48 am

David says:
December 11, 2012 at 5:36 am
I am looking for a copy of about ten or so quotes from these watermellon wacks concerning their desire to drastically reduce the worlds population….
_________________________________
Check out Modern Eugenics Movement, Huxley and UNESCO, David and Beatrix Hamburg, and Margaret Sanger. There is also some skuttlebutt about Bill Gates but I think it was just a poorly worded statement of his. OH, and do not forget Obama science czar John Holdren and his pals the Ehrlichs.
http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2042
http://www.amphilsoc.org/mole/view?docId=ead/Mss.Ms.Coll.77-ead.xml#d316287e164308268875776
http://www.whale.to/m/sterile.html
And do not forget The Eugenics Board of North Carolina
http://150.216.68.249/ncgovdocs/guides/eugenics.htm
http://www.northcarolinahistory.org/commentary/602/entry

Ed Reid
December 11, 2012 11:51 am

Gail Combs December 11, 2012 at 10:56 am
True, for CO2. CCS is not commercial now; and, likely won’t be in the foreseeable future.
Not true for Mercury. There the issue is the command and control approach.
EPA is intent on driving coal from the power generation market, at least in the US.

mpainter
December 11, 2012 12:03 pm

And who supported the UN’s International Telecommunications Union naked grab for power? The President of Russia – he says control of the internet is needed. Putin no doubt agrees.