UN Secretary General: The Climate Debate is "Over"


Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Ban Ki-moon, outgoing UN Secretary General, has declared that the climate debate is over.

… “The debate over climate phenomenon is over scientifically and environmentally,” said Ban, adding that the influence of climate change deniers or skeptics has waned.

“It is affecting our day-to-day life,” Ban said, at a new conference ahead of a G20 summit in the eastern Chinese city of Hangzhou. …

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-climatechange-un-idUSKCN11A04N

Meanwhile, back in the real world, President Obama is in my opinion misleading the Chinese government into thinking his “ratification” of the Paris treaty means something. President Obama cannot bind the USA to the commitments of the Paris treaty without ratification by a hostile US senate. Such ratification is very unlikely, because the US senate is currently controlled by climate skeptics.

Climate subsidies are being reduced worldwide, as even the greenest governments give up on hopeless renewables.

Climate consistently scores at the bottom of people’s priorities, compared to issues like the economy and the treat of global terrorism, even when the UN conducts the poll.

The only question in my opinion is whether Ban Ki-moon will be forgotten, or whether he will be remembered as the UN Secretary General who presided over the demise of the climate movement.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 4, 2016 7:28 am

..Great post Eric, but some people may not consider Global Terrorism as a “treat”…lol
“compared to issues like the economy and the treat of global terrorism, ”
Sorry, couldn’t help my self…

Bruce Hall
September 4, 2016 7:32 am

The Holy See has declared thus.

September 4, 2016 7:32 am

The nuclear debate us just starting, it is impossible to replace fossil fuel without nuclear.

Reply to  Hans Erren
September 4, 2016 10:43 am

It is impossible to replace fossil fuel even *with* a robust nuclear power component. Allow reality to intrude here, please. Let’s set the baseline accordingly.

Reply to  brians356
September 5, 2016 12:25 am

For electricity nuclear is a very good option and when it is low enough cost it can also be used for many other things. Liquid fuels for transportation though will not be displaced for a very long time if ever.

September 4, 2016 7:35 am

That funky, spunky, skunky li’l monkey, Bunky Moon is is a real comedian.

Reply to  karabar
September 4, 2016 7:51 am

Never smile at a crocodile.

Reply to  karabar
September 4, 2016 2:05 pm

No, let me correct that assertion–Bunky Moon is a liar and a thief. He doesn’t tell the truth and he wants you to pay as much as he can get away with it.
The UN needs a good housecleaning!

Reply to  RockyRoad
September 4, 2016 2:25 pm

The UN, apart from one or two of its practical agencies, has outlived its usefulness and passed its ‘use by’ date.
What may have been a good idea in 1945 has been suborned or stolen or corrupted by third world countries, egged on by the Communists, to “get its own back” on the West for a whole mélange of grievances, for some of which there might be some justification and for most of which there is none.
It has reeked of corruption from the top to the bottom for half-a-century and continues to exist only because nobody has the courage to “do an Oliver Cromwell” on it. The day it appoints as S-G someone who is not either black or Asian or liberal (in the American sense, ie near-communist) is the day I just might start to revise my opinion.
I’m not holding my breath!

Reply to  RockyRoad
September 4, 2016 6:55 pm

Perhaps a United Democratic Nations would make some sense (with a strong emphasis on insuring that true representative governance is actually in effect in member nations), but as things stand, the UN is really a coming together of the most powerful people in each country, not the people of the world.
Such a “Union” is great for “legitimizing” ruling elites (including wannabe ruling elites in places where there is still some degree of rule by consent of the governed), and will naturally lead to increased state power, and a concomitant reduction of other forms of power. What’s to like (if you’re not criminally insane)?

Science or Fiction
Reply to  RockyRoad
September 5, 2016 3:04 pm

I suggest to split United Nations. Keep what is clearly in line with its charter – Article 1.1
“To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;”
Everything else should be left to survive on it´s own – just like all other political, idealistic or activist non-governmental organizations. I guess we are better of by cooperation between groups of countries than by the monstrous United Nations.
«The primary, the fundamental, the essential purpose of the United Nations is to keep peace. Everything it does which helps prevent World War III is good. Everything which does not further that goal, either directly or indirectly, is at best superfluous.»
— Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr.
“The UN was not created to take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell.”
— Dag Hammarskjöld, Secretary-General from 1953 to 1961

Reply to  RockyRoad
September 6, 2016 6:22 am

The function of those one or two allegedly practical agencies are being better performed by others already.

September 4, 2016 7:36 am

How many times have we already heard some legend in their own lunch-box claim that “the debate is over”? Yawn.
…Mind you, when the man-on-the-Moon adds a claim that the influence of ‘deniers’ or sceptics has waned, that sounds like a feeble attempt to convince himself that the complete opposite isn’t true.
The wheels must really be falling off the gullible warming gravy train.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Erny72
September 4, 2016 8:17 am

Yup. The train crashed quite awhile back. And now, they are pedalling furiously on the only vehicle they have left: a rickety old bicycle (with no tires, just the rims). “Weee arrrrrre weeeeeeneeeeenggg!!!!”

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
September 4, 2016 8:20 am

(to explain the above allusion and….. and because I just love this video clip! 🙂 )
“They are trapped everywhere in the country….. they are not near Baghdad….”

(youtube — “Baghdad Bob”)

M Seward
Reply to  Janice Moore
September 4, 2016 10:32 am

I sooo remember Baghdad Bob too, Janice. LOL,LOL,LOL
Now there was a denier!!

Richard M
Reply to  Janice Moore
September 4, 2016 12:51 pm

Does that mean we now have Baghdad Ban?

Eugene WR Gallun
Reply to  Janice Moore
September 4, 2016 8:49 pm

Janice Moore —
Great video!
I think it would be funny if someone did a video over voice (like the Hitler videos) where Baghdad Bob talks about global warming.
Eugene WR Gallun

Reply to  Erny72
September 4, 2016 11:10 am

If climate sceptics were of waning influence he would not need to say so nor pretend that “the debate is over”.
When someone says a debate is over usually it means they are try to pre-empt it being over by wishing such a result in to existence. If the debate was over he would hardly need to waste his breathe declaring it over, since everyone would be aware it was over.
It’s like standing up and shouting ” I am never wrong. ” it is self-contradictory and obviously untrue.
Standing next to a big, red stuffed bird while saying it also tends to knock the credibility factor, bird brain.

Ron Clutz
Reply to  Greg
September 4, 2016 2:07 pm

George Will: When a politician is speaking on a topic involving science or technology, and he says, “The debate is over,” you can be sure of two things:
The debate is raging, and
He is losing.

Reply to  Greg
September 5, 2016 12:13 am

thanks Ron. That is what I was saying but you put it far more concisely.

Science or Fiction
Reply to  Greg
September 5, 2016 3:27 pm

«The game of science is, in principle, without end. He who decides one day that scientific statements do not call for any further test, and that they can be regarded as finally verified, retires from the game» «Those among us who are unwilling to expose their ideas to the hazard of refutation do not take part in the scientific game.» – Karl Popper
“The debate over climate phenomenon is over scientifically and environmentally,” said Ban Ki-moon
Ban Ki-moon is obviously not knowledgeable about science.

Paul Westhaver
September 4, 2016 7:38 am

Yup. The debate is over. We skeptics of human caused catastrophic global warming have decidedly won the debate. A debate that the warmists have claimed never happened.
I am glad he agrees with us.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
September 4, 2016 7:54 am

Well, we won the debate on meaningful action. They still have the floor on public opinion, and the amount of meaningless action is still in the tens of billions annually.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
September 4, 2016 9:23 am

“We skeptics of human caused catastrophic global warming have decidedly won the debate.”
The skeptics have won the debate on CAGW on this site, but not in the real world. Can you point to a single country or a single company in the Fortune 1000 that agrees with your position? The companies may not use the words “catastrophic” in their CSR section, but they are all calling for action.

Reply to  Chris
September 4, 2016 9:49 am

Winning the debate and winning the propaganda war are two different things entirely.

Reply to  Chris
September 4, 2016 9:51 am

Implying that somebody else should take action. LOL

David Smith
Reply to  Chris
September 4, 2016 1:06 pm

“Calling for action”
Making the right noises with no intention of actually doing anything. They’re stringing the idiot greenies along.

Reply to  Chris
September 5, 2016 12:05 am

“Winning the debate and winning the propaganda war are two different things entirely.”
Hmmm, you must have a different definition of winning a debate than I do. Let’s see, on the AGW side we have most of the world’s climatologists, scientific societies, country governments, and virtually all large companies. On the other side we have a handful of practicing climatologists (less than 100), Republican politicians, and readers of this and other skeptic sites.
Many are taking action, which you could easily see if you looked at their CSR sections.

September 4, 2016 7:45 am

Some also declared the debate over when more than 97% of all ‘scientists’ thought the Earth was at the center of the universe. Thank goodness that debate continued.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  ScienceABC123
September 4, 2016 7:55 am

According to certain speculations about the nature of the universe, the Earth is at the center, but so is everywhere else. Not everyone agrees.

G. Karst
Reply to  ScienceABC123
September 4, 2016 1:56 pm

Last time I checked, the edge of the universe was about 14 billion light years in ANY direction. By any definition, that would put our location at exactly THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE. What is the problem? GK

Tom Halla
September 4, 2016 7:47 am

Ban Ki-moon must only pay attention to the Hillary Clinton campaign in the US. Otherwise, the CAGW movement is not doing all that well.

Michael 2
September 4, 2016 7:52 am

I wonder what Angry Birds have to do with any of this?

Janice Moore
Reply to  Michael 2
September 4, 2016 8:37 am

The same thing “Sesame Street” has to do with stuff like this: propaganda.
And, hey, Michael 2 — you have been in my prayers ever since I read your comment about feeling “trapped” in your job. Hang in there. Janice

September 4, 2016 7:53 am

How many times have we already heard one legend in their own lunchbox or other claim that the climate debate is over? Yawn.
I guess it’s one last pep-talk before he is replaced to keep the faithful on mission. Sort of like Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf claiming the Iraqi army was beating the coalition forces in 2003 even as the sounds of American tanks fighting their way into Bagdad could be heard in the background of the press conference.
Mind you, when Kai The-man-on-the-Moon adds the claim that the influence of deniers of scetics has waned, that sounds like a rather feeble attempt to convince himself that the exact opposite isn’t true; because by any stretch of the imagination it’s the influence of gang-green that is waning, it’s perhaps not the beginning of the end yet, but definately the end of the beginning.
Even the Useless Numpties must be starting to realise that the wheels are falling off the gullible warming gravy train if their boss resorts to saying crap like this out loud.

Reply to  Erny72
September 4, 2016 12:28 pm

sorry mods,et al,
I don’t mean to clot the comments up with duplicated comments – it looked like my first attempt had disappeared into the aether that carries my home WiFi shortly after I hit ‘post comment’; hence the second try. Now I see both of them arrived just fine.
My bad.
[Don’t worry about it. Life happens. .mod]

Jeff L
September 4, 2016 7:54 am

Nothing is over until we say it is over :))

September 4, 2016 8:05 am

About China’s raticification: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-d&chapter=27&clang=_en#EndDec
” In accordance with the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and the Basic Law of the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, the Government of the People’s Republic of China decides that the Agreement applies to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China”.
How about the rest of China?

Janice Moore
Reply to  leftturnandre
September 4, 2016 8:13 am

It doesn’t.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
September 4, 2016 8:23 am

It doesn’t apply to {the rest of China}.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  leftturnandre
September 4, 2016 8:33 am

Excellent find. Perhaps the US Senate could declare that “This Agreement applies to the Special Administrative Region of Berkeley, CA, and the Special Administrative Regions of AlGoreville and LeoDicaprioville.”

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
September 4, 2016 2:21 pm

Or just to the special administrative region of Washington D.C.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
September 4, 2016 2:51 pm

Tom in FLORIDA — Am I glad to see YOU. (not that you would consider this a worthwhile use of my time) I have been praying for the well-being of you and yours and your property during the Hermine event. Glad you are posting — a good sign. Hope all is well with you. Janice

Reply to  leftturnandre
September 4, 2016 9:32 am

The rest is China is covered above, where China is listed along with the other countries. The declaration simply clarifies that the Agreement, in addition to mainland China, also applies to the 2 SARs.

David Smith
Reply to  Chris
September 4, 2016 1:11 pm

So they’re going to pretend to do something for all of China.That’s a whole lot of nothing.
Anybody who thinks that China is going to reduce their “emissions” is a deluded fool. China is laughing at people such as Bambam and his crew.

Reply to  Chris
September 4, 2016 5:15 pm

Optimistic little chap, aren’t you?
Tell me, are you in the market for a bridge?

Reply to  Chris
September 5, 2016 5:58 am

“Anybody who thinks that China is going to reduce their “emissions” is a deluded fool. China is laughing at people such as Bambam and his crew.”
Sure, you’re the expert on China, so we should listen to you. Have you ever even been there?
If China is laughing, why did they install 1/2 of all wind turbine capacity installed in 2015? Why did China add more PV capacity than any other country in the world?

Janice Moore
Reply to  Chris
September 5, 2016 6:40 am

Chris, you cite no sources for your information which runs counter to what I recall (I may be mistaken). China PRODUCES solar and windmill parts, thus, they want the U.S. and other countries to create artificial market share for these failed (technologically) energy ideas. China is not USING wind and solar to any significant degree. No one is. Check the stats for the % of power supplied by wind and solar in any thriving economy, e.g., Germany’s. Very small and tiny are their respective contributions. It is one BIG SC@M. And you are clearly either willfully ignorant of the facts or paid to come here and say what you do month after month.

Reply to  Chris
September 6, 2016 8:47 pm

Chris, you clearly didn’t read what leftturnandre wrote. The treaty only applies to China’s SAR regions; it’s right there in his link.
You ask us if we’ve ever been to China. Have you? You tell us that you have the entire scientific community on your side for AGW; I’ve heard the same response from others on other subjects. It’s a translation for: ‘I don’t understand science and I will shoot down anything that disagrees with me’.
Name all of those scientists and companies that agree with you. You’re only using hearsay instead of, you know, using citations, which you tell us to do.

Mickey Reno
Reply to  leftturnandre
September 4, 2016 9:59 am

And it wouldn’t matter if this agreement DID apply to all the land area of China. The authoritarian single party Communist government of the PRC can make whatever changes it wants to internal law at any time it wants. And unfortunately, that authoritarian, Unconstitutional (by American standards) model seems to be the one Obama wants to emulate. We still have a Constitution, but that poor noble, exceptional thing is hanging by a thread.
Speaking of exceptional, imagine a Harvard employed Constitutional scholar who gets elected President and does not understand that American exceptionalism isn’t about anyone’s pride, it’s not about Nationalism or even Patriotism. It’s about being an exception to the rule, an exception to government by authoritarians… the norm for thousands of years at the time of the American revolution. And our President and many in his coalition would throw that all away to make us more like present day Chinese single party Communists. Shame on anyone voting for Democrats (Progressives/Marxists/Socialists/Communists) these days.

Reply to  Mickey Reno
September 4, 2016 10:28 pm

@ Mickey, Just so you know how highly they think of Obummer? They did even roll out the red carpet on his majesty’s arrival. I doubt if he even understood the insult!.

Reply to  leftturnandre
September 4, 2016 4:58 pm

China gets gigantic subsidies and under the Obama agreement just goes ahead with what they are already doing.
Can’t disagree, the debate is over scientifically. Warmists have failed to prove anything. It is over environmentally and always has been. Climate works over centuries not in days. A new suburb or city can change the local environment considerably.
It is affecting day to day lives as each falsification is exposed, hockey stick being the most prominent.

September 4, 2016 8:07 am

UN Secretary General: The Climate Debate is “Over”
As Yogi used to say, “It ain’t over until it’s over!” AND IT AIN’T OVER! He obviously doesn’t look at websites like this one, hey!

Reply to  Lone Gunman
September 4, 2016 9:22 am

“…He obviously doesn’t look at websites like this one, hey!”
This site is only for H8Rs. You must hate puppies who will die due to climate shock because the H8Rs on this site blocked effective action to rescue the planet before it was too late.

Reply to  buckwheaton
September 4, 2016 11:05 am

I’m sure your tongue is firmly in cheek. But, just for fun, what would be “effective action” when even the infallible IPCC states reducing CO2 emissions to zero *immediately* (clearly impossible) would still take the rest of this century to have any cooling effect.

September 4, 2016 8:09 am

Mr. Secretary, if the debate is over, perhaps you could tell me just how the climate is changing that has you all concerned? While you’re at it, could you please tell me when in the history of mankind the climate was not affecting day to day life?

Reply to  Kamikazedave
September 4, 2016 9:31 am

I’m concerned that we didn’t have a summer this year, and we’re probably going to have one heck of a winter.

R. Shearer
September 4, 2016 8:10 am

My what big eyebrows he has.

Janice Moore
Reply to  R. Shearer
September 4, 2016 8:43 am

All the better to look deeply concerned with, my dear. (said the Big Bad Wolf).

Janice Moore
September 4, 2016 8:10 am

Ban Ki-moon, schlepping for the enviroprofiteers, once again…..

We need to bring … to every corner of the globe … technologies like solar energy mini-grids, solar powered lights, and wind turbines.

Ban Ki-moon
(Source: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/b/bankimoon643804.html )
“{Science realism’s success} is affecting our day-to-day life profits,” Ban said, …” (Reuters quote above)
Heh, heh, heh. GOOD!
Bwah, ha, ha, ha, haaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Note re: B. Hussein signing the Paris agreement recently — An “accord” or an “agreement” or a treaty by any other name still requires the ratification of the U.S. Senate to be enforceable in the U.S.. It will not be. Just as Monica L.’s favorite adulterer signed the Kyoto climate thing (never ratified by the Senate), it is completely useless. A political move. And that is all. What a joke — around 35 true believers (in AGW) will switch their vote from the Green party to Hillary the Yet-to-Be-Convicted. And it may provide windmill and solar stooge politicians with just enough cover to try another “fund sustainable stuff!!!!” push in the next 2 months in Congress…. which will fail in committee ….. heh.
In sum: that trip to China was a waste of the U.S. taxpayers’ money from ANY perspective.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Janice Moore
September 4, 2016 2:24 pm

Perhaps he was there just to order a half dozen Mao jackets for HIllary to use in the upcoming debates.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Tom in Florida
September 4, 2016 3:05 pm

lol. Well, they would look better (longer length jacket) than some of the polyester specials she has been stumbling around in. It is amazing that a woman with her means and staff can’t always (some days, she does okay) figure out what clothing would best flatter her (ahem) mature figure and not expose her shortcomings. She dresses like the many unfortunate women who, thanks to Democrat economic policies, can’t afford to buy anything but what they happen to find on sale at Walmart this week. Ah, ha! She’s, once again, going for the “rescue me, I’m a victim” (this time, of pitifully low fashion IQ — “pitiful,” given her life experience/sophistication/knowledge, I mean).

Frans Franken
September 4, 2016 8:12 am

“The only question in my opinion is whether Ban Ki-moon will be forgotten, or whether he will be remembered as the UN Secretary General who presided over the demise of the climate movement.”
He might be remembered as Banky Moon, as he was labeled for his intimacy with the IMF.

September 4, 2016 8:17 am

Heh, the debate was over when Lindzen and Chrichton and Stott shut down Schmidt et al in 2007.

Mickey Reno
Reply to  kim
September 4, 2016 10:10 am

Intelligence Squared debate “Global Warming is a Crisis”
Worth your time if you haven’t seen this formal debate. Lots of surprised people at the end, and this debate probably (IMO) led to Gavin Schmidt’s petulant and childish walk off the set when Roy Spencer came on during the John Stossel show.

Pat Frank
Reply to  Mickey Reno
September 4, 2016 12:15 pm

Thanks, Mickey. I was glad to see Dick Lindzen call Gavin Schmidt on his (Schmidt’s) lies. The audience made it clear that they were aware of Schmidt’s dishonesty.

Reply to  Mickey Reno
September 4, 2016 5:26 pm
Mickey Reno
Reply to  Mickey Reno
September 4, 2016 5:58 pm

Sorry about the thread drift. I promise this will be my last reply in this article. I believe one can watch full episodes of past John Stossel shows from his blog or the Fox Business web site, but here is the salient 13 min (YouTube) clip of John Stossel interviewing Roy Spencer, Gavin Schmidt and Matt Ridley: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V96k4BO2sBw
As I was reviewing all these older items, I realized that I had never read anything on RealClimate about this IQ^2 debate, so just for grins, I searched and found one old 2007 thread in which Gavin had announced his upcoming appearance. Then, in perfectly typical RealClimate fashion, he DIDN’T post an article about the result AFTER he had lost. Ergo, most of the comments are advance debate planning and cheer leading, while the announcement of “the team” loss and followups are found way down in that same announcement thread. Some of the comments are funny and/or instructive even long in retrospect. The green totalitarian bent by alarmists was strong even 10 years ago. Comment #162 ends with this gem: “One thing is for certain: as more empirical evidence comes in, the sceptics are going to become even more desperate in peddling their denial.” Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

September 4, 2016 8:18 am

Hillary has installed a Climate Room in the White House:
Hillary: “I don’t get it, nothing seems to be changing on any of these screens!”
Technician: “Um, madam president, climate change doesn’t happen instantly.”
Hillary: “What are you talking about!? Al Gore and Bill McKibben both told me that that can see it happening right NOW!”
Technician: “Er, madam president, the standard baseline for measuring climate is 30 years. Changes don’t happen instantly. Weather changes on the short term, not climate.”
Hillary: ” Don’t give me that crap! The best scientific minds, Mike Mann and James Hansen, and Al Gore all told me I could see it happening! My friend, Senator Debbie Stabenow, says she can feel it when she’s flying! Your systems just aren’t working!”
Technician: “Madam president, as you ordered, we have all the climate change metrics on display, GISS, HadCRUT, BEST, NOAA, NSIDC, we have all the IPCC models on display, including RCP 8.5, plus Al Gore’s TRIANA satellite, looking straight at Earth and giving a live feed.These all monitor the climate of Earth.”
Hillary: “Well if your fancy named systems are so good, why can’t I see the climate changing NOW!? Gore told me I could watch it happening from space! All this money, and for what? I can’t see anything happening!”
Technician: “Madam president, as I tried to explain earlier, climate change is slow, on periods of 30 years, and….”
Hillary: “DON’T YOU LECTURE ME ABOUT WHAT I ALREADY KNOW!!!! Al Gore says I will be able to see it! Bill McKibben says I will be able to see it. Even that little weasel Joe Romm says I’ll be able to see it! Do you think you are smarter than these people!?”
Technician: [long pause] “um, …”
Hillary: “I’ve watched real time feeds all over the planet! I’ve watched people being taken out in hellholes you can’t even imagine! And you can’t do this simple thing?”
Technician: [longer pause] “well, as I …”
Hillary: “NEVER MIND! [dials cell phone] Podesta? I need my own server again! These idiots setup all these screens to show climate change and nothing is happening! What!? No I don’t care about timelines! Make it happen!!!!”
Hillary: [mumbles to herself] “I’m surrounded by idiots…”

Janice Moore
Reply to  kokoda
September 4, 2016 8:28 am

Oh, kokoda, so “The White House” is what she calls her prison cell. Cute. And the toilet is now “a server.” Makes sense.
(seriously — great creative writing, k; I just disagree with an underlying premise)

Reply to  Janice Moore
September 4, 2016 9:03 am

j.m. – Copied from somewhere months ago; not bright enuf to be able to create a fictional discussion. You, however, seem to be creative with the ‘prison cell’ and ‘toilet, which I don’t get at all.
IMO, the server was just a ref. to the email scandal – a good joke.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
September 4, 2016 10:22 am

Well, dear kokoda, you will probably not get me here, either (not your fault, just my writing):
1. The underlying premise I disagreed with was that Hilliary will be POTUS.
2. (my failed attempt at humor) In her own mind, after being convicted of perjury (among other possible charges we’ve seen evidence for bringing recently), sitting in prison, she will invent the above. Thus, the cell = The White House; the toilet is called a “server” (and that was sort of a humorous metaphor, too….. oh, well).
Good for you to be so honest about your not authoring the above — nice find, good joke, indeed, however.

Reply to  kokoda
September 4, 2016 10:48 am

Hillary Rodham Clinton has talked herself into a corner at this point: She is either lying with about every single word that comes out of her mouth, or she is too incredibly stupid and forgetful to even be a school crossing guard, let alone President of the United States.
Anyone who votes for her to be President either thinks outright corruption and blatant lying to her constituents is no problem at all, or does not care.
Because no one could be stupid enough to think she is little Miss policy wonk who knows everything, except when it might be inconvenient for her legally. Then and only then she knows absolutely nothing and has the worst memory of any human being that has ever lived.
The only possible explanation is she lied to the FBI and the American people, because if she told the truth she would have to admit to committing illegal breaches of security. But the alternative is that she committed felony perjury when she lied, and obstruction of justice when she wiped her server clean after having it subpoenaed.
What is happening now will be in textbooks someday as the most glaringly obvious example of how a corrupt administration can protect a person from prosecution if they are shameless enough.
I just wonder how the Democrats are going to feel if and when the Republicans act this exact same way, and simply refuse to prosecute anyone in their own party, no matter the crime and no matter how obvious.

Reply to  Menicholas
September 4, 2016 11:22 am

But, but, … Hillary promises “five hundred million solar panels” installed under her “plan”! That’s half a billion for the lay reader. Sherwin-Williams’ slogan “Cover the Earth” springs to mind. But it depends upon what your definition of “panel” is, doesn’t it?

Reply to  kokoda
September 4, 2016 1:45 pm

the standard baseline for measuring climate is 30 years
How convenient.. should at least be 50. For me, 30 years is nothing and is still weather.

Reply to  aweijdema
September 4, 2016 6:49 pm

I’m for 2.5 million years as the climate baseline. As far as I’m concerned, the global climate won’t change until we get out of this Ice Age. For now, geological weather is oscillating between stadials and interstadials affecting various regions.
Thirty years was chosen because most people don’t have the patience to wait for the next chapter in the Book of Climate.

Bruce Cobb
September 4, 2016 8:24 am

“The debate is over”.
“The influence of Skeptics is waning”.
“It (meaning manmade climate change) is affecting our daily lives”.
Just a few of the many lies the Climate Liars have to keep telling themselves in their desperate and ultimately failing effort in keeping their belief system from crumbling.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
September 4, 2016 8:32 am

“Just a few of the many lies…..” ….. or the little tune they bravely sing to keep up their spirits as they continue, year after year, to pick up the bricks of that crumbled facade and carefully pile them up….. only to have them crumble AGAIN (!) before their eyes….. doing tasks like that can drive people crazy.

September 4, 2016 8:27 am

That’s weird.
Even Naomi Oreskes, the Empress of Consensus (h/t G. Chambers), admits there’s all sorts of debate going on in the clisci literature.
Naomi Oreskes!

September 4, 2016 8:40 am

“It is affecting our day-to-day life,”
“our” here refers to “us at the UN” where the climate hype is a big part of day to day life.

Janice Moore
Reply to  chaamjamal
September 4, 2016 8:44 am

Good one. 🙂

Gunga Din
Reply to  chaamjamal
September 4, 2016 12:30 pm

“It is affecting our day-to-day life,”
“our” here refers to “us at the UN” where the climate hype is a big part of day to day life.

Make that, “a big part of their pay day.” and I’m with you. 😎

Juan Slayton
September 4, 2016 9:06 am

When a politician, on a subject implicating science says, ‘the debate is over,’ you may be sure of two things; the debate is raging and he’s losing it.”
–George Will

Reply to  Juan Slayton
September 4, 2016 12:15 pm

Good quote! And so true.

Phillip Bratby
September 4, 2016 9:07 am

I don’t remember the climate debate. It didn’t happen in the UK. Successive Governments and the BBC ensured that there was no debate.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
September 4, 2016 10:51 am

Never happened here in the US either.
The first we heard about any “debate” was when Al Gore declared it over.

September 4, 2016 9:38 am

So, which one of the 102 climate models won?

Gunga Din
Reply to  urederra
September 4, 2016 12:34 pm
September 4, 2016 9:53 am

Yes, Yes, Yes!!! No more need for the IPCC, no more money for climate research, no more flying to conferences on climate change. We are freed from funding all those things! Let’s make a list of where the money could be really useful, like in poor countries getting them food, clothes, shelter and something besides those hokey solar cookstoves and tiny wind turbines with no backup. Third world countries celebrate! You may actually be saved.

Reply to  Reality check
September 4, 2016 12:37 pm

INM-CM4, a Russian model. Better clouds, lower sensitivity, more ocean buffering. But no case for alarm.

September 4, 2016 9:59 am

And I’ll wager that no one in the media bothered to ask him to explain specifically how global warming is affecting anybody’s life. I see plenty of refugees, but nary a single climate refugee. An army of invisible
refugees, apparently.

September 4, 2016 10:07 am

Climate Debate … Over?
If that is the case then why is Mikey Mann spamming FB about a “patition” demanding AGU drop Exxon Support?
And WTF is a “Climate Truth Org.”? if the “Debate” is Over?
Give a hand to Mikey Mann for a Sunday Funny! 😀

Uncle Gus
September 4, 2016 10:43 am

This is the guy who went to the Arctic to watch glaciers calving and then announced (approximately) “We have to stop this happening!”…

September 4, 2016 11:02 am

“It is affecting our day-to-day life,”
Exactly what one can say about the very changeable English weather. Apart from a brief visit from the Spanish plume, it’s been a rather disaapointing and cool summer.
Can I get some sort of climate compensation for that?

September 4, 2016 11:06 am

If we were to go into a cooling phase next winter, and enter a downward cooling slope that lasts thirty years there will still be activests claiming that some factor is masking GW and that when that something stops being a factor there will be a catastrophic rise in temperature.
Fortunately if we do have the predicted cooling during the next decade even the dumbest politician should learn that they can no longer ride this pony, unfortunately, they’ll just look for some other hobby horse they can mount in order to build a little personal empire.

Reply to  peter
September 4, 2016 11:53 am

Warming or cooling is irrelevant. Their ‘solution’ to the New Ice Age that was coming in the ’70s was… more taxes, more power to the government, and less fossil fuels.

Reply to  MarkG
September 4, 2016 12:38 pm

Yep. The narrative is very flexible.

Reply to  MarkG
September 4, 2016 6:35 pm

“[…] more taxes, more power to the government, and less fossil fuels.”
Odd, but that’s also the solution for Extremely Normal climate, too.

Reply to  H.R.
September 4, 2016 6:44 pm

“Odd, but that’s also the solution for Extremely Normal climate, too.”
Of course.
Extremely Normal climate is another symptom of Global Warming.

Reply to  peter
September 5, 2016 6:03 am

Predicted cooling by who?

Bob Denby
September 4, 2016 11:20 am

This may sound like a broken record, but it can’t be played too many times: Climate-change is a political device. Note:
According to Investors Business Daily, Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change (through July 2016), has admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism. She’s quoted as having said, ‘..This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, changing the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution…’
Figueres is currently a serious candidate for election to the position of Secretary General of the U.N.

Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001)
Reply to  Bob Denby
September 4, 2016 10:08 pm

Actually, there is a little bit of good news: Figueres (aka tinkerbell) is (or quite possibly was, pls see below) a candidate.
But – not unlike “climate change” being at the bottom of the world’s priority list (unless one arm, hand, finger etc. of the UNEP has decided to substitute one survey result for another) – after the 3rd round she’s quite firmly entrenched at the bottom of the candidate heap (my bold -hro):

Two of the initial 12 candidates have withdrawn from the SG race so far, and a number of others are undoubtedly contemplating the tricky question of whether and when to call it quits. Moldova’s Natalia Gherman and Costa Rica’s Christiana Figueres, for example, tied for last place in the latest round with two ‘encourages,’ 12 ‘discourages,’ and one ‘no opinion’ vote. Figueres in particular lost a lot of ground from round two, losing more encourages and gaining more discourages than any other candidate.
Before Monday’s [Aug. 29] vote, UK Ambassador to the UN Matthew Rycroft suggested that low-scoring candidates should withdraw to help narrow the field.


Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001)
Reply to  Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001)
September 4, 2016 10:15 pm

Apologies for italicized mess… obviously must have forgotten closing tag after “quite possibly was” above. Either that or WP just doesn’t like me;-)

September 4, 2016 11:53 am

Jawohl, Mein Führer.
Just another dictator at heart.

Bruce Cobb
September 4, 2016 11:54 am

It’s quite fitting that they’ve employed a fictional character, “Red” the Angry Bird to be the ambassador for their fictional manmade Climate Catastrophe.

September 4, 2016 12:26 pm

“Meanwhile, back in the real world, President Obama is in my opinion misleading the Chinese government into thinking his “ratification” of the Paris treaty means something.”
The Chinese are not fooled by Obama. They know the U.S. Constitution as well as he does. Yes, that’s right, Obama knows the U.S. Constitution, he just chooses to ignore the parts of it that restrict his authority.
The Climate Agreement is just going through the motions for the Chinese. They are not required to do anything under this agreement until 2030. Odds are, they won’t do anything after 2030, either. They will be happy to sign this meaningless agreement. It makes them look good in the eyes of the Globalists, and they don’t have to sacrifice anything for it. Win, win.

September 4, 2016 12:53 pm

Well there you have it. Ban Ki-moon has just ordered all you alarmists to quit debating the subjects of climate change and AGW . You need to follow your leaders orders and march to the tune of that organization which has been the leader in the AGW/Climate change scam. You have your orders. However we skeptics will continue to debate since we think that the UN is full of it and we do not look to them as leaders of anything but pure BS and despotism.

Janice Moore
Reply to  RAH
September 4, 2016 3:11 pm

Hooray! RAH made it back okay (I assume!) from his Elk Grove long haul!

Reply to  Janice Moore
September 4, 2016 10:35 pm

It never ceases to amaze me how disconnected from reality those clowns in the UN are. I would be all for the US leaving and throwing the bums and dictators out of the country if not for the fact that it is almost always better to have a seat at your enemies table than to be outside the door wondering what they’re up to.
Since the one day out and back up the Chicago area I hauled a very heavy refer load of Nestles chocolate and strawberry milk to a warehouse in Flanders, NJ (NW of Newark). Rig would have been a little over the 80,000 lb. max allowable with full fuel. Then went down to Camden, NJ and picked up a load of frozen snack foods and brought that back. That was a much longer haul than the run up to the Chicago area and back. Then I took vacation all of last week. Now back on call.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
September 5, 2016 6:44 am

Take care, RAH, the road warrior (seriously — it is a battle out there with all you deal with, esp. all the rude or incompetent drivers!).

September 4, 2016 1:21 pm

The scary global warming debate hasn’t even really begun because the promoters of the earth has a fever run and hide like cowards. Really the only thing settled is they want the checks to keep flowing on one of the biggest scams in history .
Of course climate changes with or without humans but a trace gas representing a fraction of ! % of the atmosphere has virtually no effect .and if anything it is positive . That is not in debate . Look where all the scam promoters live and their lifestyle . Not a global warming Gandhi among these self dealing weasels .
Moon Bank is outgoing ? Now that is very good news .
Science is about facts , hypothesis and proven theory . Political science is about the distribution of power and resources . The scary global warming industry is political science as UN officials intended in order to distribute power and resources as they saw fit .
The air is running out of the scam so it is even less likely promoters of the earth has a fever will actually debate anything . Most have made their money already .

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Amber
September 4, 2016 5:42 pm

Beg to differ, Amber.
The Climate Hustle is just getting started.
It’s about to get its “second wind” via control of the internet. The intent of the Socialist CAGW-loving crowd is clear. Freedom of speech on the WWW, enforced by US Dept of Commerce ownership of ICAAN and the resulting 1stAmendment protections, has been in the Left’s crosshairs since the 90’s when outlets like DrudgeReport broke the Clinton-Lewinsky story while major media outlets controlled by the Left were trying to silence the story.
And the climate hustle is one of several major paths to increased political power and control across the Western-Developed nations.

September 4, 2016 1:44 pm

Just remember folks that the ‘hottest year evah’ meme is predicated on an 18+ year pause followed by el Nino driven by NATURAL variability. Yep, the greatest threat humankind has ever faced is now completely reliant on perfectly normal natural variability to prop it up. Shite doesn’t get more real than this.

Steve Case
September 4, 2016 3:38 pm

The only question in my opinion is whether Ban Ki-moon will be forgotten, or whether he will be remembered as the UN Secretary General who presided over the demise of the climate movement.
Unless the left wing liberal democrats win the debate, and you find yourself in jail for writing so many BS articles. I’m not so sure they are going to lose the debate anytime soon.

September 4, 2016 4:48 pm

Mr. Obama is deadly serious about circumventing our Constitution and laws to get his way. He is certainly misleading a lot of people but the Chinese President is not one of them.

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  hunter
September 4, 2016 6:10 pm

The Chinese will go along with the West’s climate propaganda. Both Xi and Obama know this.
It’s not about climate for either of them.
It’s one thing, and one thing only. That one thing is increased power within their respective geopolitical spheres.
The Chinese leadership understands the West’s socialist climathustle for what it is. That is why they were more than happy to sign on when the Hustlers don’t ask them to change anything in their energy use until 2030. They see that 14 year window as the time the West’s economic self-destruction will be complete.

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  hunter
September 4, 2016 6:22 pm

The Chinese will go along with the West’s climate propaganda. Both Xi and Obama know this.
It’s not about climate for either of them.
It’s about one thing, and one thing only. That one thing is increased power within their respective geopolitical spheres.
Obama has a failed Presidency and is clearly a wannabe Dictator. And he understands history is written by the winners.
The Chinese leadership understands the West’s socialist climate hustle for what it is. A disguised socialist movement seeking to seize more political power from voters who only think they love in constitutional democracies.
That is why the Chinese leaders were more than happy to sign on when the Hustlers doesn’t ask them to change anything in their energy use until 2030. They see that 14 year window as the time the West’s economic self-destruction will be complete.
They know that 2030 the hustle will have succeeded or failed. Either way, it will be moot in 2030.

Joel O’Bryan
September 4, 2016 4:59 pm

So now the UN declares the climate debate over.
Climate skeptics will now be considered committing crimes against humanity.
UN is soon to take over the internet root domain management via an ITU-ICAAN alliance.
Climate skeptic web sites and their domain hosts will soon be receiving “cease and dissist” orders from UN bureaucrats.
Ignore the order and face global internet domain name death.
1984 is here.

Ian H
September 4, 2016 5:08 pm

I don’t think we ever actually had a debate. Or did I miss it? All I saw was a preordained conclusion and a lot of shouting and intimidation and calling everyone who disagreed a denier.
Ban Ki Moon wants the UN to be a world government, hence CO2 must be dangerous. His is a purely political view. The man wouldn’t know a scientific conclusion if he tripped over one. Why are we listening to this man pontificate on scientific matters he knows nothing about.

September 4, 2016 5:11 pm

Here’s another debate that is “over”.

Janice Moore
Reply to  clipe
September 4, 2016 7:18 pm

Thank you for sharing that, clipe. A fitting parallel to the AGW issue. One side are realists, basing their conclusions on facts and data and logic. The other are speculationists, basing their conclusions on “I just think” and conjecture and unsupported (with data) extrapolation.
The AGW issue is driven by greed (and power-over-taxation, which is, essentially greed).
The border control/”refugee” issue is, apparently, driven by emotion (is there money involved??).
There is, thus, more hope for the science realists — truth has won. It is only a matter of time until the propaganda (e.g., the bogus “97% consensus” lie) can’t provide enough cover for politicians to support the wind and solar sc@mmers anymore.
The true believers in AGW who also care enough about it to “save the planet,” are not a real problem anymore.
With the “refugee” issue, on the other hand, an emotional impairment hinders intellects of people such as Louise. They simply can’t see, not ever, the facts and truth has no chance to illuminate their understanding.
The heart is the seat of wisdom. When it is cold, it is sick. They lack the ability to empathize with the victims of the crimes cited by Steyn. Not until the lightning bolt of THEIR family member or THEIR friend
being attacked by an orthodox Muslim or by a man for whom Islamic values (like treating women like animals) are cultural norms shocks their brains back “on,” will such cold hearts and blind minds see the truth about screening out those who will not renounce the violent parts of their religion/culture before entering nations that respect the civil liberties of EVERYone.
And, as Farage pointed out, enforcing the criminal laws to prosecute acts that are NOT okay in a country that has civil liberties no matter WHAT someone’s religion says.
In the meantime, we must simply ignore the emotionally blind
(some from hatred of Christi@n and Jew1sh belief in God — they see honoring the Musl1m religion as a way to “get at” those they h@te (yes, h@te, for what reason, I do not know, pure emotion; you can see it in their snarling comments on WUWT, at times))
“Muslims are peaceful people, let them all in” crowd
and get on with protecting our citizens.
(needless to say…)

Reply to  Janice Moore
September 6, 2016 8:54 pm

Arbour also worked as a UN Human Rights Judge, where she oversaw rape cases involving African and Yugoslavian women. For her to joke about Farage and Steyn being sex-obsessed maniacs was a disgusting thing for her to say. I think she just doesn’t want to come to terms that it’s not just third world women who get raped.

Janice Moore
Reply to  clipe
September 4, 2016 7:19 pm

Great video, clipe — I used at least one bad word, so my reply will appear…. later. (I hope) 🙂

Reply to  Janice Moore
September 5, 2016 5:38 pm
High Treason
September 4, 2016 7:36 pm

Real science can never be settled. The debate can never be finalised on real science. Only pseudoscience or fraudulent science can be called settled-the liars tactic of avoiding scrutiny.
We all know the UN should be more scientifically savvy, so it is highly suggestive that the UN itself is a fraud. Wait a minute, the UN is trying to gain control over the internet. Rather massive conflict of interest-the UN wants to control information – information that has been pre-ordained since it is supposedly settled.
The conclusion should be very clear by now- the UN is a FRAUD and was from the beginning-they always wanted control over us by promoting their own propaganda. The climate scam, which has no actual evidence whatsoever is a great conduit for deception. It preys on FEAR and GUILT-2 basic human emotions that are exploited frequently. LUST, SLOTH and GREED (especially those raking in money taxing air) are the other base emotions that can be exploited. Just look at the 72 virgins promise made to Jihadis.
If control over the internet occurs on October 1, freedom of speech and thus human freedom itself is gone.
We do indeed live in “interesting” times.

September 4, 2016 8:10 pm

If CAGW were genuine, these people would welcome any debate or questioning as a method of getting their message across. They would welcome each and every contrary opinion as a means of counterpointing their message with scientific data.
However if it were not genuine, the CAGW proponents would attempt to shutdown such debate by stonewalling and diversionary logic, as seems to be the case here.

Reply to  Peterg
September 5, 2016 6:09 am

No, the issue is that to have a substantial impact on CAGW, we must begin taking action now. Countries, companies and the UN believe now is the time for action. Not everything in life can be debated until eternity.

Reply to  Chris
September 5, 2016 7:21 pm

Explain CAGW in layman terms.

Pat Frank
Reply to  Peterg
September 5, 2016 8:15 am

There is no CAGW in evidence, Chris.

Reply to  Pat Frank
September 7, 2016 1:03 am
September 4, 2016 8:37 pm

Might be time to take a look at the computer models for Hermine Mr Ban-ki Moon before you make such wild claims that question your judgement. These models which are only a few days have been horrible versus the actual track.
The science is not settled but your judgment is settled and it’s not pretty.icomment image

Janice Moore
Reply to  Catcracking
September 4, 2016 9:14 pm

Applause! GREAT argument, catcrackin’! Slam-dunk!

Reply to  Janice Moore
September 5, 2016 9:56 am

Thanks, obvious accountability.

September 4, 2016 9:50 pm

Let us hope. Funny how media fails to report the non-binding status of the Paris accord under US law. No it’s all the inevitability of history hype. Where have we heard this before.

September 5, 2016 3:58 am

When the giants in power (politicians) something yourself “screwed in the head,” then there is no normal who can confront them. They will realize its plan, despite all the sacrifices that will be found in that decision. And these solutions have never been neither logical nor humane, just to “tycoon” policies and wishes.

September 5, 2016 5:10 am

‘…The climate debate is over….’
Oh, right – so all those climate scientists can pack their belongings into an Iron Mountain box, and send their cv’s to Macdonald’s to see if they need any burger flippers….

michael hart
September 5, 2016 5:44 am

For something that’s over, he sure likes to talk about it a lot.
And when a complete stranger tells you “trust me”, that’s often the last thing you should do.

September 5, 2016 7:41 am

Hopefully with your exit Mr. Moon, the entire illusion will cease to be.

September 5, 2016 8:26 am

With the US and China ratifying the Paris agreement, continued roll out of renewable energy world wide, continued decline in the use of coal and continued evidence of global warming (hottest year ever, even in satellite record, second lowest arctic sea ice extent), then yes, for the majority of the world and for science, this issue is settled.
Only those whose political stance depends on objection to climate change action keep up the increasingly futile fight…

September 5, 2016 9:37 am

I would like to see the UN audited by a reputable accounting firm and the findings made public. Does the media ever do any actual investigating or reporting of the UN, or just cheer-leading? Having friends that have done consulting work for UNICEF and ECOSOC they tell tales of rampant fraud, waste, and abuse. Most decision makers at the UN push ideologically Marxist claptrap heavy on “central planning”, higher taxes, and more gov’t as the “solutions” to every problem. Do you want to help the world’s poor? Well, don’t give your money to the UN as the poor might see 1 cent out of 1 dollar spent to help them. It’s that bad.

September 6, 2016 6:23 am

Is it over with IPCC scientists or just the political committee that goes its own way with a separate report and much different uncertainty?

September 6, 2016 6:37 am

If you thought that the science was settled that was merely an error on your part. R Feynman

September 6, 2016 6:31 pm

The Chinese are laughing up their sleeve over this whole ‘Paris Agreement’ nonsense.
Not only have they got a free pass to increase their emissions as much as they like, they also upped the baseline late last year for good measure – announcing just before the Conference Of The Partygoers in December that they had ‘just discovered’ that their coal use (and thereby total emissions) were WAY higher than previously disclosed.
That announcement should have been met with much wailing and gnashing of teeth by the CAGW zealots, but it wasn’t because China gets a free pass for some strange reason.
And then you’ve got old Obama pretending he’s ratified the agreement. What a shower of shysters!

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights