Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The 20,000 strong inner core of the global climate movement, currently gathered in Marrakesh, is quietly panicking over the looming possibility that Trump will cut off most of their “US leadership”.
Prospect of ‘President Trump’ Casts Cloud Over COP 22 Climate Conference
Experts who spend their days plotting contingency plans to avert the effects of climate change are now confronted with another weighty scenario: what happens if Donald Trump wins the election.
A dark cloud is hanging over Marrakesh, Morocco, this week as climate experts and world leaders gather for their first major summit since signing a landmark deal in Paris last year to tackle climate change.
The COP 22 climate confab kicks off on Monday — just one day before the U.S. presidential election. And should Americans elect Republican Trump, an avowed climate change skeptic who has pledged to rip up the Paris agreement, experts worry that a slew of global accords could crumble.
“U.S. leadership was critical in getting the Paris agreement across the finish line,” said Elliot Diringer, executive vice president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, a think tank focused on the environment. “Many in Marrakesh will be watching very closely for the election outcome.”
…
Still there are safeguards in place that would preserve the U.S. government’s involvement in the Paris accord, with or without a Trump presidency.
The agreement has already been ratified and terms formally kicked in on Nov. 4. Parties involved with the agreement are now officially locked into the plan for the next four years — the exact span of the next U.S. president’s term.
…
The rather shaky claim about US “ratification” and “safeguards” against US disengagement is intriguing.
If the Paris agreement was ratified by the USA, it certainly was not ratified by the US Federal Senate.
Perhaps there is a new amendment to the constitution which I am not aware of, which states that US Presidents have the power to bind the United States to international treaties, without review by other branches of government.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Here are the three false assumptions which Griff and other believers in this world foolishly embrace:
(1) That science is incapable of being corrupted by money and politics. When government and science climb into the same bed, it is extremely foolish and naieve to believe that this is not possible. The U.N. and its UNFCC and national govts everywhere all in the same bed here abusing science for financial and political activist ends.
(2) That a so-called “consensus” in science (and everywhere else), if and when there is one, is incapable of being wrong. If my understanding of some science history here is correct, this is not always true. For many years, medical science believed that stomach ulcers were caused by stress and anxiety. If I recall correctly, it became known some time back that a bacteria can be responsible for ulcers.
Is it also not true that, for many years, science believed that the Earth’s tectonic plates did not move? Are we now aware that they do indeed move very slowly? If these two examples from science history are indeed true, then by no means should we believe in the correctness of so-called “consensus”.
(3) That individuals like Griff are incapable of believing in the wrong people…which I suppose ties back to (2) above. This, in my opinion, is a flaw in human thinking and psychology. When we hear someone saying things that are consistent with what we need and want to believe, then that person presumably is incapable of being wrong in our minds. It’s as much an emotional thing as it is anything else. This is the power that underlies all religious cults. The contrary, falsifying evidence that runs against the grain of the accepted belief system is then rejected or downplayed for emotional reasons if for no other ones. A religious belief system can be mistaken for and falsely treated as science or something resembling it. That point has been made here many times at WUWT.
Griff’s inability to understand any of the above demonstrates that he still has quite a bit to learn from life. It leaves one wondering if individuals like him ever will learn these lessons from life.
Very well put.
……sorry, misspelled naive. Is it also not true that, for many decades, Pluto was accepted in astronomy as a full-fledged planet? I myself recall being told that is was in grade school. Was its downgrading to the status of a dwarf-planet not due to a better understanding of its nature after many decades? Again, if this is true, then should scientific “consensus” be the basis for decision-making, whether it is about climate change or anything else?
Pluto’s downgrading had more to do with the fact that we were beginning to find a number of similar sized objects at similar distances from the sun.
We were either going to have to live with a rapidly growing number of planets, or redefine the definition of “planet” to exclude Pluto like objects.
Thanks Mark. I stand corrected.
I’m English, but for the sake of your country (and possible world peace!) PLEASE vote Trump.
Don’t worry. Your $100 billion drawing rights on U.S. citizens is secure, along with many others. We’ll take it from their kids if necessary.
The ‘finish line’ for Paris is NOT Obama’s signature. It is US Senate ratification – and it still hasn’t gotten there yet. Trump will make sure it never will.
You are incorrect about the first statement. There are three levels of international agreements. The firstmis a true treaty, defined by Jefferson as eternally binding save by mutual agreement. That requires senate ratification. Second is a pact, which requires simple majority enabling legislation in both houses. TPP is a pact. Pacts must have unilateral opt out clauses. Third is an executive agreement, signable by the president under three narrow and specific circumstances: his responibilities in foreign policy (e.g. Recognizing countries and ambassadors), as commander in chief (e.g. Agreeing to a foreign NATO head), and persuant to hismobligations to faithfully uphold the law. COP22 is this last, the argument being the Clean Air Act.
Means nothing, because Trump can remove all funding and exercize the opt out on Jan 22.
The confabs are always in places I would like to visit on other peoples money. But we already know about that don’t we.
The US is slouching into these agreements much like our lack of immigration law enforcement. There is a consensus at the top and if the people don’t agree they just “let it happen” Republican Senator Charles Grassley if Iowa is a good example of this. Nominally a powerful member of a party that does not favor alternative energy mandates; Chuck gets nuts if you try to end the wind subsidy.
All those useless Easter Island like giants scarring the Iowa countryside spin off money to the FOX (friends of Chuck). So the game is rigged.
It’s true that countries are “locked in” to the agreement for four years. But at any time after three years in force for a party, the party may resign on a year’s notice. In the meantime there’s no requirement on a party to make any actual reductions in its emissions. The Paris treaty is a piece of fluff because countries have such widely differing aims and views they couldn’t agree on breakfast.
they couldn’t agree on breakfast.>?i>
Smoked peppered mackerel, marmalade on hot buttered Ciabatta toast, and some filtered Kenya please, white no sugar.
“SHOCK VIDEO: The UN is now banning ALL media.” from COP22….
https://youtu.be/URI2ZQEuT3Y
http://www.therebel.media/journalists_banned_from_delhi_who_nanny_state_conference?utm_campaign=india_who_1&utm_medium=email&utm_source=therebel
Oops, that should be COP7…
He probably won’t win. The GOP put up / allowed a completely lame candidate. Anyone who’s not some sort of cultish follower could see that from the get go. It’s really sad. Anyone besides Trump would have wiped out Clinton. Hopefully next time around the GOP will ignore bigots, truthers, Nazis, tin foilers and all the other fiends. There are still real conservatives out here who are not monsters or loons. And most of us know Russia is still an enemy.
…And yet he gets 25,000 at his rallies almost every time in every state…Hillary is lucky when she gets 3,000 and Caine gets 300 !! That is a lot of “monsters and loons” in every state !!
James wrote: “He probably won’t win. The GOP put up / allowed a completely lame candidate.”
The establishment GOP fought Trump all the way. They are still fighting Trump. Trump is still standing.
James: “Anyone who’s not some sort of cultish follower could see that from the get go.”
So anyone who currently supports Trump is a cultish follower?
James: “It’s really sad. Anyone besides Trump would have wiped out Clinton.”
Trump wiped out all the other Republicans. Don’t think Hillary didn’t have dirt on all the other Republican candidates, and if they didn’t have any, they would just make it up like they have done with Trump. The intensity of the negative pileon would be no different, just the details.
None of the Republican candidates could have stood up to the Leftwing Media (with the exception of Huckabee). The Leftwing Media would have rolled over them like a steamroller, just like they are trying to do to Trump now. Except Trump fights back. The other candidates would already have surrendered. They all desire to be loved by the Leftwing Media, so they really can’t fight back and attack them the way Trump does. They would be alienating their loved one the Leftwing Media, and that’s the last thing they want to do. They think the Leftwing Media is essential to their success. Trump doesn’t play those games.
Trump has one blemish on his side, the Lockerroom talk. That’s opposed to all the corruption and criminality on Hillary’s side. It’s no contest!!! The choice is clear, and it’s not Hillary.
James: “It’s really sad. Anyone besides Trump would have wiped out Clinton.”
I disagree. The media is so in the tank for the progressive left, it wouldn’t have mattered who the Republican candidate was, the press would have still pilloried them relentlessly. This bias has always been present but took on a life of its own with the first Obama election, where they fell in love with the idea of a charismatic minority President who promoted the vacuous promise of hope and change. In 2012, Romney was clearly the better candidate, but the media decided it wanted more Obama. If not for the media enabling the Benghazi cover up by promoting the party line of a inflammatory video, his fecklessly inept foreign policy would have been revealed and Obama would have never won. Clinton is such a wreck of a candidate and exhibits such obvious criminal behavior, Trump should be ahead by 20 points, but because of a media that heavily favors Clinton, he is not.
TA ” Trump has one blemish on his side, the Lockerroom talk. That’s opposed to all the corruption and criminality on Hillary’s side. It’s no contest!!! The choice is clear, and it’s not Hillary.”
Smart women know the truth. The truth is, men are thinking about sex every seven minutes.
Smart women know that men talk this way. Now, there is a difference in the abrupt ways, language or terms various men use. Some are worse than others. Some Men grow up and some do not.
The guys yelling at the girl walking down the street with perverse taunts is a D*I*C*K*.
The guys talking low amongst themselves , just looking , have some morals.
Smart women will vote Trump.
Dear Hillary, I ain’t no stand by a woman Tammy Wynette voter.
“So anyone who currently supports Trump is a cultish follower?”
A grand total of nobody said that. Please argue against what your opponent actually said.
“Trump wiped out all the other Republicans. ”
Not true. Had the race started with Trump and one other candidate, he would have lost.
The problem was that the conservative vote was divided between 3 or 4 candidates. By the time most of them had dropped out Trump had “won” enough primaries to make his lead unassailable.
Over all Trump barely got 30% of the votes. That’s not wiping out in my book.
Trump has many blemishes, starting with his history of supporting liberal positions and Democrat candidates and finishing with his disasterous economic and foreign policies.
James….any candidate the GOP put up…would be lame
That’s their game….they don’t want to win the presidency
Trump was not their candidate…and he’s doing better than McCain and Romney, which were their candidates
The biggest fear the GOP has…is actually winning the presidency
[snip – worthless spam comment about queen of england -mod
England, Austrailia, Canda, etc have all failed to live up to this standard.
Can we get on British welfare like the immigrants do? How much do you guys pay, anyway?
Asylum seekers aren’t allowed to work, are given public housing which is in bad condition and no one wants to rent and get a weekly allowance of £36.95 per person.
Immigrants would only get the same as a UK citizen, assuming they were legally allowed to work… EU migrants typically claim less in benefits than UK natives.
Item: During the primary campaign, the Republican candidates complained that the media was going easy on Trump.
Item: I am an election Judge here in Texas. it was my perception that the Donks were crossing over to vote for Trump.
Item: The drop in the nationwide numbers voting in the Donk’s primary was about equal to the increase in the Republican’s primary.
Item: The media repeats over and over unsupported allegations of what Trump might have said while ignoring the crimes of Mrs. Bubba Clinton (The trailer trash wife of the first trailer trash president)
So…..for all you fools that are taking the high moral ground and voting for anybody else. You have been screwed.
Trump is the Republican candidate that the media were praying for.
I thought they were praying for McCain and Palin again…
“So…..for all you fools that are taking the high moral ground and voting for anybody else. You have been screwed.”
They have screwed themselves and all the rest of us if it ends up putting Hillary “Houdini” Clinton in the White House. I hope this “Houdini” moniker is just temporary, and after tomorrow, we never have to figure Hillary Clinton into our future plans again, and she will finally get caught up in one of her “tricks”.
EMAILS: Clinton Sent Classified Info To Chelsea After UN Climate Talks
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/07/emails-clinton-sent-classified-info-to-chelsea-after-un-climate-talks/#ixzz4PMbbH8Ax
Hillary had her housekeeper print out classified documents at Hillary’s home, along with her other household duties.
That right there is enough to convict Hillary Clinton of gross negligence *with* intent.
If Trump wins and we get an honest Department of Justice in place, the entire Clinton family and friends may be subject to jail time. They are certainly guilty of numerous federal felonies. Any competent prosecutor could make a case against these people with what we know now.
If Hillary gets elected, she can stonewall this for a long time. If Trump gets elected, she cannot. It’s kind of a matter of life or death for the Clintons and their associates. They are going down if they lose. They may go down, even if they don’t, but that will be a hell of a road to have to travel. But we can’t let injustice stand, can we? I didn’t think so.
Both candidates suck. This is the mother of all “lose – lose” elections. Reality bites, yes it does.
James, See the Metallica video above.
I don’t see any serious downside with Trump. I see a LOT of downside with Clinton. Lose-Lose does not describe the situation properly. We might win taking one side, Trump’s. We will definitely lose taking Clinton’s side. The practical choice is clear.
The problem with the US Constitution is that after all, it is just a piece of paper. If the President declines to follow it, and the Congress declines to contradict him, and the Supreme Courts decides it says whatever they want it to say… well, then, We The People only have as a final resort the solution offered up in 1776.
The real problem is the lying Leftwing Media, who create a false reality for millions of people, and render them incapable of properly governing themselves by lionizing the bad guys and demonizing the good guys.
Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would never have been elected had they not had the Leftwing Media doing everything in their power to fool the American people into thinking these were the best candidates we had.
The Leftwing Media has betrayed its duty to report the truth to the American people so they can make good decisions for their future. Now, the Leftwing Media has turned into a propaganda machine to promote Leftwing ideology and gain political power for the Left. Domestic enemies of our freedoms is what they are.
King Obama must have put his royal stamp on the agreement, and handed the decree down to his minions to execute, or face certain death. Thus it is written and thus it shall be.
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/11/why-did-china-pick-2030-oh-look/
http://jo.nova.s3.amazonaws.com/graph/country/china/wpp2010_poptot_prob_china.gif
Are there enough 5 star hotels in Marrakesh for such a gathering?
The Republican politicians first said Obama’s “ratification” required Senate approval, then said it meant nothing anyway when he announced what he had signed. It appears that this is a fight Republicans don’t believe they can win – yes, the President CAN commit the Nation to such treaties himself – or they are okay with what he did.
I no longer trust either side to be honest about their beliefs on CAGW. COP21 has no teeth and all powers are currently no acting on their rhetoric. For or against? And why? It all looks like a shell game that might not even have a pea involved.
Except for taxation and crony capitalism, none of the activities look to reduce energy use, consumption in general or CO2 emissions for the next 30 years.
So much for the world about to die.
My exact thoughts Eric; what are these “safeguards”? Exactly? Are they planning to nuke Marrakesh on Wednesday? Whatever it is, it sounds shady and more than a little conspiratorial (oops, there’s that word again. I’ll buy tinfoil tomorrow…)
There’s no need for them to fear. How people vote in America tomorrow is irrelevant. The system has been so corrupted, only Hillary will be allowed to be president. Trump cannot win, even if a sufficient number of citizens vote for him that he would win the popular vote and the electoral college as well, it won’t matter.
The end justifies the means, and the democrats running the US will not allow their power to slip away. In a quote usually attributed to one of their great heroes, Joseph Stalin, “It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”
“even if a sufficient number of citizens vote for him that he would win the popular vote and the electoral college as well, it won’t matter2
The US has rigorous checks on voters a really, really low level of voter fraud… this is just not the case.
If they’re running the US why did they allow the Republicans to gerrymander congressional districts so that it’s virtually impossible for the Democrats to win the House?
Congressional districts are drawn by the States.
There is ZERO chance Trump wins.
And he should be very happy about it.
Just google “Clinton body count”.
Information for non US citizens (and probably most US citizens) about how this works.
Today is the day when each State and Wash DC will vote for a list of electors who will then cast their votes for President and Vice-President. That vote will take place on Dec 19th. Electors are associated with the candidate who is on the ballot however, there is no obligation for those Electors to vote for their associated candidate. They can vote for someone else. Now, all Electors are presumed to be loyal party members who would in fact vote for the candidate they are associated with but there is no law that they must. This vote is then sent to Congress which will, in the presence of a joint session, count the votes and announce the winner. That will happen on Jan 6th. So we will not know how all the Electors actually voted until Jan 6th when it becomes official.
If no candidate gets the required 270 electoral votes, the election goes immediately to the House of Representatives where each State delegation will get one vote and the winner will be declared President. The Vice President will be chosen by the Senate in the same manner.
If there was ever an election where some of the Electors will vote for someone else rather than their associated candidate, this is it. Imagine what would happen if the projected winner by the media turns out not to win. Velly intellisting.
There is a major difficulty with paperless electronic systems – there is no possibility of a recount.
This is the fundamental reason for switching to a paperless system by the “elites/bureaucracy”.
Once these machines are in place, one only has to influence or change the software and anyone can win. The “Fraction Magic” system, for example, can be set up in advance at any level with pre-programmed margins e.g. 80% v. 20% or 50.1% v. 49.9% and the software will produce that result rounding up the number of votes to whole numbers. Providing one has the manpower it can be carried out in real time on the day.
Everybody who votes is told their vote has been counted correctly but any intermediate check would show the pre-programmed results in terms of a percentage share of the total vote, as will the final result.
The only possible defence against this would be an accurate exit poll of all voters!
It would be interesting to see the comparison of voting percentages in paperless voting areas against the remaining paper based systems which are much more difficult to make major changes to. I would wager there will be a significant discrepancy.
SteveT
First of all, you can never get an accurate exit poll. People say different things in public and you would have to interview everyone so why not just manually count their votes.
In Sarasota County there is a paper trail. We mark a ballot that is fed into an optical scanner and the ballot itself is preserved. Now, I couldn’t tell you whether the scanner has been programmed to produce a certain outcome or not. How do we know it recorded my vote as I voted?
Although tedious, I believe it to be necessary to go back to a paper ballot and count each one in the presence of a member of each party who would then together certify a fair count. I do not trust electronics for voting.
Yes, that was what I intended to convey. The exclamation mark was intended to indicate the impossibility of an accurate exit poll – although any exit poll may indicate a problem depending on the degree of manipulation.
Any method that involves a means of obtaining an instant answer (electronic or electro-mechanical) is open to abuse far more so than counting a more obvious number of paper ballots (especially as if there is any doubt, a more stringent count can be carried out when the paper votes exist).
SteveT
Should Trump win, climate skeptics should be poised to take full advantage of having someone with an open mind on climate science in the White House. A free and open debate on the merits (or lack thereof) of CO2 as a possible cause of harmful warming should be undertaken. A positive result could be a curtailment of government funding of climate science research with a concomitant reduction in wasteful spending.
So, have they cancelled the rest of the programm yet? Trump is on 274 now.
The Hildebeest is refusing to concede. Gore 2000 redux?
She’s watching ‘Requiem for a Dream’ right now.