South African UN Climate Delegate: “We have passed the era of choices.”

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to Durban’s UN Sustainable Development delegate Debra Roberts, we no longer have the option of choosing how to respond to global warming.

Global warming is ‘right on our doorstep’, panel warns

NEWS / 20 OCTOBER 2018, 6:00PM / ARTHI GOPI

Dr Debra Roberts, Durban’s climate change champion and co-chairperson at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said global warming was an issue that was “on our doorsteps”, and every action counted.

We have passed the era of choices. The report is clear, we have to act now, and rapidly, and at scale. These are significant changes we have to make and we’ve never had to do it at scale before. It’s an unusual challenge,” said Roberts.

“Industries need to change, and we as consumers need to change to make sure we have an impact in bringing about change. We also have to make these changes rapidly because we have about 12 years to cap the temperature rise.

“We need to build our buildings differently, have more meat-free meals, look at how we move around with transportation and what energy we are using. We can no longer be complacent, it’s right here on our doorstep,” she said.

Read more: https://www.iol.co.za/ios/news/global-warming-is-right-on-our-doorstep-panel-warns-17566339

Make no mistake, the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming was the opening salvo of the great power grab greens have been building up to. If enough people believe their call to arms, we really may pass the “era of choices”.

Advertisements

101 thoughts on “South African UN Climate Delegate: “We have passed the era of choices.”

  1. Great!

    So, Mr. South African, what mandates (remember no choices) has your government and your people opted to self-impose on your nation and its economy?

    Hmmm???

    Just saying,
    GoatGuy

  2. Great!

    So, Mr. South African, what mandates (remember no choices) has your government and your people opted to self-impose on your nation and its economy?

    Hmmm???

    Just saying,
    GoatGuy

      • Once again Eric fails to capture the subject of his portrait. I was initially unsure whether it was a man or a woman ( though it seemed male). Then I saw it was about S.A. and though : oh maybe it’s black person. Lips … maybe , but now I was unable to tell black/white/male/female.

        I used to do a lot pencil drawn portraits myself when travelling. You soon need to learn which ones worked out and are worth showing to others and which are best converted to roof installation feedstock at the local recycling facility. 😉

        • No, it definitely looked like a pudgy, dowdy middle age or older white female with no real skills but a ‘college’ education.

          I mean that scarf really makes up for the pounds and the throat wattle.

    • She is employed by one city and in order to keep her job must continue to prove that her input is both necessary and valuable.
      Just don’t ask her to explain her personal carbon footprint as she travels far and wide on junket after junket.

    • Hey Goatguy, I know it’s really exciting to be the first post but if you did not realise that “Debora” was not a Mr S. A. then you did not even read the first friggin line of the article before posting your comment.

    • There’s to be a ‘carbon tax’ – because the Income tax is about as much as it can be, the company tax is falling because more businesses are closing, and the Value-Added Tax (VAT) has been increased by a percent because the fiscus is down because so much of it has been stolen. And any ‘carbon tax’ will come out of ordinary peoples’ pockets and straight into the pockets of the ‘connected’.

  3. We can start to believe these Chicken Littles when:

    – we see them teleconferencing their meetings instead of high priced jetting to exptic locales on OPM.
    – Tom Steyer and Al Gore “Walk the talk” and give up their private jet lifestyles and big mansions.
    – the talk that others give up meat in their meals begins with them.

    For these folks, like Ms Roberts, climate sacrifices are always someone else’s sacrifices.

    • We are the world
      We are the Big Shots
      We make the rules
      For S. E. S . (someone else’s sacrifices)
      Using O.P.M. (other people’s money),

      YOU are the peasants
      You are the tools
      Who have to dream less
      Have less and do less
      And obey the rules
      That we ignore.

    • Direct quote from the article Joel. Passed is correct usage AFAIK – you pass something, you have passed it.

    • Past is past tense, pass is present, or future tense……..isn’t it?

      In this case we ‘may pass’ (future tense). The ‘past’ is history (past tense).

      Or, to confuse matters, we are driving ‘past’ a road junction, but we can also ‘pass’ a road junction.

      English is such a conundrum I’m glad I’m a Scot. 🙂

      • One has to pass the present tense to be in the past. If one is in the pass, then one has passed the present. It’s no different if one os playing pass the parcel, which a lotter of Warmistas do.

        • The old lady might have been living in the past, but when you passed her, you were doing 25 MPH over the speed limit, lucky it wasn’t 26.

      • The ‘past’ is history (past tense).

        Nope, the above use of ‘past’ is that of a noun …. and it is a synonym of the noun “history”. Me thinks that when words are used as “nouns” are always “present” tense unless they are immediately proceeded by a “descriptor” word such as ….. “biblical past”.

        Or sumpin akin to that.

    • And past, not pass, Eric.

      What was that about quoting what you disagree with?

      we really may pass the “era of choices”.

      ‘may pass’ is the future conditional tense and is correct in that context. The past participle of the verb ‘to pass’ is passed. Past is a noun , being the opposite of future.

      Now what’s your point ?

  4. “…need to build our buildings differently”. No, no, no, no, no. No more buildings. Buildings are part of the problem. We need to cease life-enhancing economic activities immediately.

    • Agreed – Many Awards and Kudos for Urban Planning, but not one whit of intelligence on Climate Science! Another Political “The sky is already falling” entity, like 95% of the IPCC makeup.

    • Indeed. She speaks of what “industry” needs to do, yet makes it clear that she only has experience of being a consumer. Probably never done an industrious day in her life. Typical of greens who think the answer to all the world’s problems is to just sell some over priced home-made vegan candles at WOMAD festivals.

    • Here bio, as linked above.

      “Dr. Roberts is currently a lead author of Chapter 8 (Urban Areas) and a contributing author to Chapter 12 (Africa) of Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report, due for release in 2014. “

  5. We all have to change. Industries have to change. Governments have to change. And we have to change big. Or else our climate will change. Then it will be too late to change, because the climate will have changed. Then the climate will change us. The earth will be changed, everything we know will be changed.
    Say, can you spare some change? I’m fresh out.

      • Nothing to say that whatever you do doesn’t put you in more danger, remember your actions to solve climate change doesn’t work until 100 years or more from now.

        It’s easy to see you could spend all your resources to be carbon neutral only to get wiped out in the next hundred years as you didn’t have the resources to recover. So the precautionary principle says you don’t make the change 🙂

      • Humans fear change. If we want everything to stay the same we will have to change the way we do everything.

        Take your choice.

        • If we had wanted everything to stay the same in the past we would still be living in caves and eating our meat and fish raw (and no, I don’t mean steak tartare and sushi).

  6. Always a hoot to drill down to see exactly what her PhD is. From her web page:

    “Areas of Specialisation: Metaethics and Normative Ethics
    Areas of Competence: Philosophy of Law, Political Philosophy, Metaphysics, Philosophy of Mind, Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics and Plato’s Republic”

    If this lady ever stumbled over a differential equation or any real science, she has fully recovered from it.

    • … stumbled over a differential equation …

      I’ve done that.
      John Steinbeck, in his novel Cannery Row, used a reference to Algebra in much the same way.
      I would be better served to re-read the novel than to read anything more of climate change champions such as Dr Debra Roberts, of Durban.

      • Thanks for bio , all makes more sense.

        If I ever stepping a pile of Metaethics , I would have wiped by shoe on the nearest clump of grass and moved on.

  7. Ironically South African clean coal technologies offer Africa huge massive improvements in quality of life wealth success opportunity.
    Yet climate imperialism even has infected Africans so that they would rather continue being enslaved to the wealthy Green in the west then to build their future together.

  8. She’s not Pro-Choice? Positive progress. Think of the children!

    That said, Nature is in denial of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming… Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change… not so much climate change, which is Her order.

  9. An engineer, with a solid Mathematics foundation, cannot help but look askance – with deep distrust – at academics in certain disciplines that appeal with ease to the emotions to convince the ignorant masses about the hastening climate doom.

    Do people like Dr Debra Roberts have any credibility when they are not prepared to listen to the challenge of the extraordinary Mathematician, George Polya? He wrote in 1944, “in theoretical matters, the best of ideas is hurt by uncritical acceptance and thrives on critical examination.”

    This applies to both the formal and natural sciences. Let me spell this out in clear language:
    “in theoretical matters (which makes up the bulk of climate science),
    the best of ideas (the science is settled)
    is hurt by uncritical acceptance (critics are climate deniers/not real scientists)
    and thrives on critical examination. (simply alarmism or a real alarm?)”

    • An excellent video, thank you for the link.
      Laying out the facts, backed by evidence, is the best way to show something.
      To present it in a calm on way makes it even more compelling.

  10. At the age of 65, I am so glad that they have moved forward the day of no return. Wouldn’t miss it for anything. All that biblical burning stuff, sounds great, I will bring the BBQ tongs.

    Ask any of these cagw sheep to place a personal wager that it will actually occur, guess what, not a single one would dare to. But they will wager tax payers money.

    Nice sunny day here, temperature the same as it was 100 years ago, life is good.
    Regards

    • You would think that if you set the closing date of the bet to be a month after Thermagedon, that they’ll be all for it. After all, they’re not going to make a payout art they? It is very evident, that they don’t believe their own words.

  11. “Dr Debra Roberts, Durban’s climate change champion and co-chairperson at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said global warming was an issue that was “on our doorsteps”, and every action counted.” — Most unfortunately people like D. Debra Robert’s becomes co-chairperson of IPCC, what we expect. This gentlemen has no knowledge of natural variation in precipitation. Recent drought is part of it. The Durban rainfall showed a clear W followed M pattern with 66 year cycle along with the sub-multple of 22 years. This work was published in 1984. During drought years, temperature goes up.

    Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy

      • And even knowing that, doesn’t tell you what she identifies as. It could believe it’s male, or a poodle, or something.

  12. Dr. Roberts’ expertise is urban planning, ecology, and biochemistry…..study of climate, not so much….just another one of the IPCC cadre of non-experts with a Ph.D. behind their name.

  13. South Africa has run out of time running down its economy and desperately news other people’s money.

    • I respectfully disagree.

      These ANC idiots look like they’re going to replay the entire apartheid who-ha from beginning to end (so much for Mandela’s brief shining moment). It ought to take about 20-30 years to hit rock-bottom.

      This will work about as well as Venzuela (except Venezuela had oil money). Get ready to see pictures of starving little kids.

  14. “we no longer have the option of choosing how to respond to global warming.”

    I disagree. If global warming is on my doorstep, I can choose to do what the warmists want me to do in the vain hope that it will be enough to get it to go away, or I can invite it in. The idea that CO2 is evil, and that a little warming will be harmful, is not science. It is speculation. There is evidence that increased CO2, and even a little warming, is a net benefit to the planet. There is no proof that the benefits will not outweigh the problems. But there is proof that banning fossil fuels would cause a disaster for humanity. I say that global warming is a good thing and should be welcomed. Any problems that may arise can be dealt with. Why would any thinking person choose to do something that definitely WILL cause harm in order to prevent something that only MAY cause harm? It makes no sense.

    • Louis
      You don’t really understand. There really is no AGW. Click on my name to read my final report on that. So what they did is change the issue to ‘man made’ climate change. Now, obviously, the climate is changing all the time. Not only from day to day and season to season but also at longer time scales. Currently we are cooling. It will lead to droughts at the higher latitudes and flooding at the lower latitudes. Simple physics. But is it not convenient that we can blame man for it?>
      So, they want to redistribute some money to the people ‘affected’ by climate change.
      Maybe that is not a bad idea? Or what do you ay?

  15. Hasn’t South Africa recently built some of the largest coal-fired electricity generating stations in the world? So what right does it have to be preaching to other nations about taking drastic climate action? Are they taking lessons from David Suzuki, Al Gore, Neil Young and Leonard DiCaprio?

    • I dont think its ‘recently’ cos there is a ‘leccy shortage there.

      They have mostly coal and a nuke. They are being told that renewables will save them, and new nuclear is unaffordable.

    • Well, seeing as those shiny new coal fired power stations are about 4 years overdue and 200% over budget, maybe the incompetence is the ANC’s way of taking climate action? Mind you, waking up yesterday morning (late) because of a power outage is sort of driving things home!

  16. As a middle aged dog that spends a lot of time on the front porch, I didn’t notice anything had changed. In the next 5 years, a cataclysmic event will occur that will catch everybody off guard. Deal with it when it happens.

  17. “have more meat-free meals”

    Let’s see the UN start by eliminating meat from the menu at the Visitors Café at the UN Visitor Centre at UN Headquarters in NYC. Then eliminate meat from meals available to staff and diplomats. Won’t happen.

  18. What focus group did these people get the 12 year number from.
    Is is like Obama’s promise of $2500 savings for everyone if Obamacare was instituted?
    They came to that number because it was high enough that it got big positive attention during the campaign but low enough that people would still believe it.
    There was no factual basis for the choice of that number.

  19. “We have passed the era of choices.”

    Yep. You and your ilk have reached the state of wishful thinking and pipe dreams.

  20. Debra Roberts cannot play in the racist politics of South Africa and be somebody.

    She can however be a high muckety-muck when it comes to the international scene and be an actor.

  21. Debra Roberts cannot play in the racist politics of South Africa and be somebody.

    She can however be a high muckety-muck when it comes to the international scene and be an actor..

  22. How do you rationalise this woman?
    (Today’s Trivia: Debra, Debs, Devon, Deborah = The Bee. Rather odd that innit, you’d have thought that bees with their ‘stinging thing’ would be masculine. Nowt as queer as folks eh)
    She’s like me, scared shitless by cameras.

    To be coming out with this stuff, she is patently ‘high-as-a-kite’
    As per the IPCC with their latest verbiage about ’12 years’.
    (Or wherever the goalposts are now. Does anyone really care? As soon as you find them, you also find that they’ve moved)

    I suggest it is the Football Crowd Effect = a critical mass of people, determined to ‘have a good time’ (who doesn’t) and the IPCC have reached that ‘critical mass’ Some while ago.

    They are euphoric and in that critical mass are self-sustaining, they feed off each other’s energy. It perpetuates itself, at least for a while. A bit like tornados or hurricanes even?

    As happens at rock concerts, (good-time places entirely contrived to achieve criticality) someone will ‘bubble up to the top’ and go Crowd Surfing.
    A totally euphoric person will emerge and become symbolic of that self generated ‘happiness’ and hedonism.
    She is A Crowd Surfer. J. Hansen not least also.

    The search for a ‘good time’ sees COP conferences being scattered across the globe at nice places with 10’s of thousands of participants. Guaranteed to create the crowd or self-induced euphoria.
    I’d venture 20,000+ in one place for one reason *should* get a real good party up and running.
    It’s surely what ‘herds’ and social creaturing is all about.

    THAT is hedonism, the desire for a ‘good time’ and intrinsically, *nothing* at all wrong with it – it is after all what makes life worth living.
    Hence we often see the desire for endless electricity, coal, oil and malting barley.
    and cannabis and coca-cola and cocaine and caffeine and prozac etc etc – chemically induced Good Time

    That IOL place is interesting:
    https://www.iol.co.za/business-report/opinion/free-speech-at-risk-as-debate-on-climate-change-grows-2008639

    The writer of that article uses the words ‘insanity’ and ‘mob’ (slightly Ad-Hom) but here’s a sampler:

    Today the mob consists not of ignorant ruffians but of highly educated, well-heeled, well-fed, well-housed and otherwise intelligent people, often some of the brightest and best society produces.

    I venture to disagree with that.
    The ‘mob’ tell us all those things and many/most people take that onboard, not least because they want to become all those things (rich & educated & well-heeled, nice houses & power-over-others etc etc)

    But these well-heeled, our leaders, doctors and scientists who tell us that it is OK and in fact ‘recommended’ or even required to consume a particular array of mind-bending chemicals.
    Alcohol. sugar. opium. Prozac and now of course, cannabis.
    Climate Change is a self-induced euphoria, it is all inside people’s heads.

    And they make their very nice & comfortable livings off the backs of supplying, regulating and taxing those things.
    Plus not least, from THE fastest Growing Growth Industry of all time= Health Care.
    (To attempt repair of the damage done and slow the death-rate coming from using all that chemical junk)

    But then, to try a little meta-ethics of my own – Is That Wrong?
    If everyone is ‘having a good time’ and Growth Industries are an absolute requirement for modern day economies, what’s not to like?
    (What does Kool Aid taste like, is it nice? IOW: Addictive?)

    But especially, why the need for chemically induced Good Time?

    Is it conceivable that ‘something must be wrong’ with The Real World that sooooooo many people use soooooo many chemicals to escape from it?
    No mistake, and the well-heeled are the biggest users and also the most mendacious about doing so.

    • Not to be fussy, but to be fussy. All stinging bees are sterile females and that “stinging thing” is a vestigial ovipositor.

  23. ‘“We have passed the era of choices. The report is clear, we have to act now, and rapidly, and at scale. These are significant changes we have to make and we’ve never had to do it at scale before. It’s an unusual challenge,” said Roberts.’

    ‘We’, kemo sabe?

    She sure says ‘we’ a lot. She’s free to do whatever she wants. She is not in charge of ‘we.’

    • Why don’t we leave the killing of everyone who disagrees with us to the left.
      They’ve been doing it a lot longer and are better at it.

    • It only takes a few comments like this from Ray to be repeated around the world in other forums to show the rest of the world that all of us who frequent WUWT are raging lunatics. I vote that this comment be struck from the record so as to preserve the morals of WUWT and all the other commenters who visit here to discuss and spread civilized ideas. That isn’t freedom of speech: this is the definition of murderous hate speech. I would expect to permanently banned if I wrote such a hate filled murderous comment. I know the Mods are busy and all, but this type of hate diatribe should never, ever get posted.

  24. “We have passed the era of choices.”

    Does she understand what she is saying? That the time has come for coercion, for force of some sort to make the global populace behave as she claims it should? That democracies and republics are impediments because “the people” aren’t making the correct and necessary choices in her rock-solid worldview?

    She is saying that the era we are in demands and justifies a revolution in the street if a coup by powerful insiders doesn’t happen. If change won’t happen organically, it must be imposed.

    She is saying our laws and legislative processes in which disparate views and concerns have legitimacy need be set aside. When the “era of choices” is over, what needs come is a totalitarian imposition of will by the powerful over the powerless – the Green wise over the unwise.

    This is classic Marxist, the position that a “natural” society of theoretical freedom for all is a sham, that “freedom”, i.e. choice, exists only for the governors. The “people” must displace the existing power elite with their own to bring the “right” way of living to the commoners. Truth is inadequate, process is a barrier to justice and structure is designed to perpetuate the status quo. Talk is useless; only force is sufficient.

    What bubble does she live in? Or is this just hyperbole? I would like to think she exaggerates for effect, but my gut says she (and others of similar speech) are speaking clearly. And we should pay attention.

    There was a term for one of her verbal vein: rabble-rouser. Professional agitator is another. Then there is the really scary one: political agitator. The type who call out the mobs but are never in the front lines, never at the pointy end of the stick or – here – waiting for public transit to go and pick up her weekly allotment of insect protein.

    The “era of choices” is over. Play it out, Debbie. All revolutions require the active support of the military. You really think the American military is behind the IPCC alarm?

    I object to the use of this sort of aggressive posturing – if hyperbolic posturing it is – because it energizes the worst aspects of people. It inhibits rather than empowers the betterment of the world – the 20th century has adequate examples of what happens when the mob is aroused to a fury and law, order and due process are abandoned for “the public good”.

    But in the back of my mind is the feeling she is not virtue-signaling. She and a number of other UN figures, with their “useful idiots” like McKibben and Suzuki, are serious. Armchair revolutionaries they may be, but the type that see a troop carrier outside the White House disgorging soldiers in blue berets on their heads and Gaia symbols sewn on their sleeves as a wonderful image. In fact, a necessary image.

    • “She is saying that the era we are in demands and justifies a revolution in the street if a coup by powerful insiders doesn’t happen. If change won’t happen organically, it must be imposed.”

      The objective is to seize government and the means of production – the Soviet model. “Climate change” is just a prop to get us to accept the revolution. The Left doesn’t care about global warming, it’s just a tool.

      Italian communist Antonio Gramsci warned 80 years ago that seizing government and the means of production will always fail, due to cultural hegemony. Communists never get that, and continue to destroy civilizations.

      Obama said, “We are the people we have been waiting for.” The right people to implement socialism. It always fails because the people didn’t implement it right, or, my favorite, as Venezuela descends into Hades, the Left declares, “Oh, that’s not real socialism.”

      It isn’t about the people implementing it. Obama et al are wrong. It’s about the people it is being imposed upon. Unless they are culturally prepared for it (few, if any, are), the people will reject it, and the government will of necessity become totalitarian.

      Roberts says, “We need to build our buildings differently, have more meat-free meals, look at how we move around with transportation and what energy we are using.”

      The world’s reply is, “Nah. You are not in charge. We’re going to keep doing things the way we like.”

      • The only way to be “culturally prepared” for Communism (and Socialism for that matter) is to have a lobotomy.

        That’s why it has failed and will always fail.

  25. “We have about 12 years”.
    Can’t wait for the pronouncement in 11 years time; ‘we have about one year’!

    • Warren, I think they’ll give us another 12 years (this game has been going on for over 2 decades).

    • My personal favorite is Britain’s goofy Prince Chuck telling the world (in roughly 2000) that it only had 6 months to save itself.

      The only proper response (even from an American) is to wish Queen Elizabeth a VERY long and HEALTHY life.

  26. I don’t recall anyone asking UN delegates to determine who has freedom, and who doesn’t. Last I checked that was a prerogative of national sovereignty. You would think this is what she should be an expert about, but she seems blissfully unaware of the concept:

    Sovereignty
    The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which an independent state is governed and from which all specific political powers are derived; the intentional independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign interference.

  27. Here’s a choice I make daily…ignore the fools with the sandwich boards telling me the world is going to end. I think for myself thank you!

Comments are closed.