Time for the UN to get out of climate change

Dr. Ball is clearly over the target. He should be seen as academic hero for his stance. Flax only comes from guarded positions. He has been tacking it and with honor will likely continue to do so.

The UN allows nation states to jaw jaw instead of war war.
Diplomacy instead of military interactions.
Negotiating distribution of powers allows a more efficient distribution of resources (trade is efficient for everything – even sovereignty). The UN is a good thing.
But I do agree that the UN is wasting its time with AGW.
And Ban Ki Moon is a failure as UN Secretary General.

Planet earth was rescued from catastrophically low levels of beneficial CO2 at close to 280 ppm(parts per million) 150 years ago.
Now, we are at close to 400ppm, with most measures of life on this planet showing, as expected(from real laws of science like photosynthesis) that life on his planet keeps doing better and better as CO2 gets higher and higher.
Stating otherwise contradicts all the evidence.

You can buy a scientist and his opinion. The search for unanimity is blinding people to reality. The fact that scientific society has been directed to prove the theory does not leave much, any, room for people to question it (unless they don’t care about funding and their university chairs). Such a phenomenon is evident at the BBC, the British public broadcaster which, self-evidently, has instructed its producers to include AGW positivity in all its output and has banned any questioning of the thesis. For a public broadcaster this is so scurrilous, a misuse of power, to depart from public opinion, which is diverse, to promoting a view derived by, who?, is propagandist and marks the crossing of a line between free speech and bureaucratic imposition.
Similarly, the coercion of scientific opinion will prove whatever the whoever’s wish to prove. Science is good at that. Rather than science girding up its loins to cope with a world whose change is inevitable the discipline is lapsing into a form of Puritanism which resembles the periodic pronouncements of the world’s end. Scientific realists metamorphosing into cranks. Science’s obligation is engineer life in its next evocation and not to merely present as the sandwich board man proclaiming ‘the end is nigh’.
AGW is such a linguistic phenomenon. The diversity of people that propose opinions on the topic, from railway engineers to geneticists, is only admissible because of their conforming in linguistic standards. Their evocation of the dramatic-emotional, the content usually best suited to magazines and novels dealing with relationships, they have managed to anthropomorphise weather. They have taken a norm, that everybody loves the world and its wonders, and professed an ownership, a deeper understanding of the potential for loss which is framed as that loss of a personal bereavement. The more the emotional content can be cranked-up the more ‘experts’ appear talking about inevitability.
In broadcast assertions of the topic we also sense the dramatic appreciation of the topic and switch to the maudlin voice, the epitome of the theatrical adaptation of the English country vicar, the measured tone and simpering sonority. The weepier the topic the more sincere, and in modern terms the better informed. Hooray for sentences that trail away in falling tones depicting world weariness and despair. Contrary to this, the deniers tend to be animated and their tones lively and life affirming, a thing that speaks of energy and industry, while its counterpart is the complete antithesis. The falling tone is obviously heartfelt and the animated signifies what, nuttiness, disconnection? Science is now the mistaken effort of trying to swat a mosquito in a darkened room rather than deploying a spray to end the torment.
Why was Al Gore influential? Because he intoned the cause of despair and the linguistic emotional frustration of the inarticulate, he Disney-fied the topic for easy assimilation against the usual scientific practice of big words and obscure semantics, he just got their first and prevailed. He gave us Bambi after its parents were shot! If the science is not actually certain and cannot be demonstrated, if constant assumptions about the metrics of the issue are continually disproved, there is always the emotional blackmail to fall back on. That thing of the irrational. The medieval fear of the forest, the devil, that kept the Middle Ages in thrall for centuries. (There is a correlation between the decline of religious attachment and the rise of personal insurance (Norman Davies’s ‘Europe: A history’.) We demand certainties, certainties sell. For a developed society that continually applauds itself on its levels of sentience we are devastatingly open to myth, astrology, portents. These things seem part of our DNA, the unknowing insecurity of ancient man and his lack of understanding demanding that he place faith in gods and their appeasement. This is where we are with AGW. It appears that to question what is still a theory is to put us in bad odour with the great deity (of your choosing) and with such gods being omnipotent and, usually, vindictive, our accommodation demands that science and opinion be corralled, silenced, for fear of ethereal powers and their vengeance.

“An Engineer December 14, 2014 at 2:30 am Florida is slowly but surely going to be under water.”
So too is London, and the whole south east block of England in fact, but it has absolutely nothing to do with climate change (Whatever that is) and sea level rise.

This new ‘deal’ involves enormous incentives for ‘the developing world’ to fraudulently manipulate climate data as they will get big payments from the ‘developed world’ if temperatures ‘increase significantly’.
There needs to be brutal sanctions to prevent such fraud and corruption taking place, including the permanent disbarment and bankruptcy of all politicians who vote through such fraudulent data as ‘true’.
I would not trust for one second any future data based on land-based thermometers around the world, because the incentives for fraud are simply too great.