Climate lunacy takes center stage in Poland

IPCC Poland conference presents fictional climate chaos and fake renewable energy salvation

Paul Driessen

The unwritten rule seems to be that each successive climate report and news release must be more scarifying than any predecessors, especially during the run-up to international conferences.

Thus Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report 15 claims governments worldwide must make “unprecedented changes in all aspects of society,” spend $40 trillion by 2035 on renewable energy, and impose carbon taxes that climb to $5,500 per ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) by 2030. Or temperatures could climb another 1 degree F (0.5 C) and bring utter cataclysm to human civilization and our planet.

Not to be outdone, the 1,700-page 2018 US National Climate Assessment wailed that failure to eliminate fossil fuels and roll back American industry and living standards would send global temperatures soaring 15 degrees F by 2100! Chaos and food shortages would ensue; US economic growth would plummet.

The hyperbole continues in Katowice, Poland – where 30,000 activists and bureaucrats (and a few scientists) are meeting to finalize regulations to implement the 2015 Paris climate treaty and compel wealthy nations to give trillions of dollars in “adaptation, mitigation and compensation” money to poor countries that have been “victimized” by climate change, even as the rich nations de-industrialize.

All of this certainly plays well with those who orchestrated these reports and programs, are ideologically opposed to fossil fuels, or get paid to advance climate chaos and renewable energy narratives. However, a very different response among other audiences is increasingly evident around the world.

People look out their windows and realize the “unprecedented climate and weather chaos” isn’t actually happening, is little different from what they and previous generations experienced, and cannot possibly be attributed solely to fossil fuel use. They know the sun and other powerful natural forces have driven frequent climate changes throughout history, and play equally important roles today.

They understand that the scary headlines are the product of “scenarios” conjured up by computer models that blame climate change on greenhouse gases. They see the boy who cried “fifty 20-foot-tall wolves” far too often. They don’t buy the notion that today’s incredibly wealthy, high-tech, energy-rich societies are somehow less able to deal with climate change than those that lived through the Little Ice Age, for example. They typically put climate change at the bottom of any list of pressing concerns.

More and more people understand that fossil fuels provide 80% of US and global energy – and are essential to lifting billions more people out of crushing poverty. They see Asian and African countries building thousands of new coal- and gas-fired electrical generating plants, and making and driving millions of new cars. They know even Germany and Japan are burning more coal, as they realize that wind and solar subsidies and facilities raise energy costs, kill jobs and hurt poor families the most.

People resent being scammed and get angry when they realize their taxes and energy payments often line the pockets of climate activists, scientists, bureaucrats, politicians, and wind, solar and biofuel cronies.

Above all, a growing number see the proposed solutions as far worse than the wildly exaggerated and even fabricated climate disasters. They won’t tolerate having their livelihoods and living standards disrupted or destroyed by carbon taxes, even higher energy prices or fossil fuel bans – especially when the antipathy toward those fuels is combined with plans to terminate nuclear and even hydroelectric power.

In recent weeks, millions of mostly poor, working class and rural French citizens have joined the Gilets Jaunes (Yellow Vests) movement, protesting and even rioting against President Macron’s proposed carbon tax hikes on their driving and living standards. Even a French police union has sided with the protesters. A shaken Macron finally postponed the tax for six months, then scrapped the plan entirely.

The protests are the first serious backlash against international eco-imperialism. They won’t be the last.

In Africa alone, twice as many people as live in the USA still do not have electricity, or have it only rarely and unpredictably. Can you imagine your life without electricity? And yet they are told by the EU, environmentalists, the World Bank and others that they must restrict their ambitions to what is possible with wind, solar and biofuel energy. Would you accept such carbon colonialism? Can actual, real-world climate risks possibly be worse than the horrid poverty, deprivation and disease that afflicts them now?

The World Bank recently said it would kindly give poor countries $200 billion during its FY2021-25 cycle, for “adaptation and resilience” in the face of manmade climate change. But still nothing for fossil fuel or nuclear power. The White House should read it the riot act, especially if US money is involved.

Poor countries don’t need climate cash. They need to develop: energy, infrastructure, factories, jobs, health, living standards. They need to do what rich countries did to become rich – not what (some) rich countries are doing (or at least saying) now that they are rich. Thankfully, many are doing exactly that.

Abundant, reliable, affordable electricity, motor fuels and factory power creates its own prosperity; its own ability to improve roads, hospitals, schools, homes and so on; its own “drop dead money” to tell carbon colonialists to take a hike. “Green” energy is insufficient, unsustainable and ecologically harmful.

With America likely being joined soon by Brazil in rejecting the Paris climate trap, poor nations are on firm ground. Ontario (Canada), Poland. Australia, China, India and other countries have also rejected carbon taxes and coal use restrictions. The Paris deal is fast becoming a climate Potemkin Village.

But what about that National Climate Assessment? Wasn’t that a Trump White House document? It certainly needed some adult supervision, to ride herd on the 1,000 Deep State scientists and bureaucrats who prepared it. However, the White House let them prove how loony climate alarmism has become.

Indeed, as Nick Loris, Roger Pielke, Jr. and other experts have pointed out, the NCA was based on absurd assumptions (eg, vastly increased coal use and no energy technology advances over the next 70 years) and a ridiculous worst-case global temperature increase of 15 degrees F by 2100. That’s twice as high as even the IPCC’s worst-case projections, and far worse than Garbage In-Garbage Out climate models are predicting. It’s more than 15 times the total warming our Earth has experienced since 1820!

The NCA is also based on rampant cherry-picking of data, to wildly inflate climate risks; an almost total failure to factor in the incalculable benefits of fossil fuels; and a refusal to consider the plant-fertilizing benefits of more atmospheric carbon dioxide. It just depicts the CO2 we exhale solely as a dangerous climate-changing pollutant. The NCA also ignored the fact that actual observations show no increases in drought, no increases in the frequency or magnitude of floods, no trends in the frequency or intensity of hurricanes. It didn’t mention the 12-year absence of Category 3-5 hurricanes making US landfall.

Just as egregious, the Deep State NCA claimed continued fossil fuel use would hit the United States with $500 billion in annual climate related costs by 2090. That’s more than twice the percentage lost during the Great Depression. It’s 10% of the US economy in 1971. Even with modest economic growth, it’s likely to be a trivial 0.6% of America’s GDP in 2090. The NCA bogeyman is a little stuffed bear.

But based on IPCC and NCA fear mongering, America and the world are supposed to keep their fossil fuels in the ground – including what the US Geological Survey says is the “largest continuous oil and gas resource potential ever assessed!!” Over 46 billion barrels of oil, 280 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 20 billion barrels of natural gas liquids in just part of the Texas-New Mexico Permian Basin.

No one denies that the climate changes, or even that human activities have some effects on climate and weather. But there is no real-world evidence that human CO2 emissions have replaced the sun and other natural forces; that another degree of warming would be cataclysmic; or that humans can control climate changes and weather events by tweaking the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Want some facts and common sense? See what CFACT and Heartland have been saying in Poland, and read books by Dr Roy Spencer, Marc Morano, Anthony Watts and others. They’ll be a breath of fresh air.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) and author of books, studies and articles on energy, climate change, the environment and human rights.

Advertisements

63 thoughts on “Climate lunacy takes center stage in Poland

  1. I think that the exponentially increasing shrillness and ridiculousness of the Climate Alarmists hyperbole is falling on mostly deaf ears, and directly undercuts their credibility.

    The people just don’t believe them. Probably never did, but even less so today. Every decade that passes where people just look around them, at their lives and think “wow, they said we’d all be underwater by now, and dying of heatstroke, and starving to death … but guess what, life is pretty damned good, and is getting better all the time.”

    Pretty hard to get people to disbelieve what they are actually experiencing, despite 40 years of shrill, “last chance” warnings that everybody better go nuts or we’ll all die within 10 years … or whatever.

    This is like the last gasp of the dying beast, when he may appear most dangerous, but just wait a few minutes, and he’ll expire.

    • Entirely different story when you talk to the kids. They don’t even question it, global warming is a fact just like the theory of gravity.

      • Michael,

        It should please you to know that not all kids think that way. I am technically, part of the oft hated millennial age group. But I have lurked around this site for years. And Ive taught my children well, my 9 year old daughter actually told her teacher off in school after her teacher started into the whole global warming fear mongering. It’s not the children’s fault if their parents leave them “alone” with the teachers. From my experience and observations, many Millennials are actually far more involved in their children’s academic life then previous generations. I think the term is helicopter parenting? If you can convince enough millennials of this insanity, I honestly think we will fix this where it matters, the next generation…

      • Why do you think the left are always pushing for lower and lower voting ages?

        The West was doomed when our ancestors let communists take over the schools. It takes many years of experience to counteract two decades of indoctrination.

      • Well, they’re kids and have no point of reference but their own short lives. As they grow older, they learn. The smarter ones learn to question.

        But it is inevitable that today’s pre-teens and teens in 40 years will look around, just like we do today, and say, “Wow, they said we’d all be underwater by now, and dying of heatstroke, and starving to death … but guess what, life is pretty damned good, and is getting better all the time.”

        Every generation has to learn about stuff on their own.

        • Remember when WE parents told our little children about Santa!
          Remember how they found that there was NO Santa!
          Same will happen with CO2 is responsible for everything.
          They will find out on their own.
          Always takes a little bit of time!

          • Stopping to believe in Santa was (is) relatively easy. You can see more than one Santa during the day – even at the same time. And after all, this IS “simple” fiction.
            In contrast, the matter of CO2 and rising temperatures is a chicken-egg dilemma. One group of scientists says CO2 is the cause of heating, other equally well-known experts state the opposite. Which data do you trust?
            .-

        • Besides that, they’ll learn how bad things were when they were kids compared to today. Like having to walk five miles through the snow going to and from school, uphill, both ways…in July! Or working on a pig farm in the afternoon, hauling five tons of manure from the pig pens to the fertilizer plant in a wheelbarrow, for 5 cents a day, and saving up for 10 years to buy a car. And loving it!

      • Not just the kids – my 35 year old son, who gets most of his ‘news’ from the US TV news and entertainment sites, thinks his father is out of his head for ‘denying’ CLIMATE CHANGE(tm). From what I’ve read, across most of the English speaking world, the schools are brainwashing the children into ‘Progressive’ views, along with the majority of the MSM. So, unless you read the ‘non-progressive’ newsblogs (advt: Breitbart) or follow sites like this, you will get only the CAGW/CACC guff.

  2. It’s time for the world to put an end to this nonsense. It won’t happen overnight or with mass government backing but it will happen. You can’t fool everyone forever despite the backing of the MSM and the UN.

    • They don’t need to fool the people if they rule them.
      And that is their aim.
      They have captured the education systems in many countries.
      They have much of the civil service [or local equivalent].
      They just need votes.

      Here in the UK Mr. [Jeremy] Corbyn stands ready to ”lead” – he will be knifed in the back by the ambitious, but realistic, McDonnell immediately after the polls close in the next General Election.

      Sad ending to a once-great nation.

      Auto

  3. Lunacy….

    Mike Bloomberg literally flew in ice from Greenland for an art project about global warming caused by excess carbon emissions

    Because climate change caused by excess carbon emissions is killing the planet and all, billionaire businessman, philanthropist and possible 2020 presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg helped finance this public art project that flew in giant hunks of ice from Greenland to London so people can watch them melt:

    They want you to come and touch the ice and feel the global warming in action:

    https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/12/11/mike-bloomberg-literally-flew-in-ice-from-greenland-for-an-art-project-about-global-warming-caused-by-excess-carbon-emissions/

  4. The science supporting the UNFCCC’s agenda is horribly broken and how their followers continue to try and justify this repressive agenda is becoming more and more insane. We can only hope that this will lead more to transcend their political bias and see the conflict of interest that’s been driving the science out of climate science for decades.

    • “Massive, UN-sanctioned climate protest shuts (and shouts) down Trump administation pro-energy event.”

      the Trump administration could / should use this as a justification for withdrawing from the UN’s over-arching climate agency.

      • Even better is to reduce support of the UN itself by some large dollar amount and state clearly that future permitted attacks on US delegates will lead to an even larger reductions.

  5. ‘Can you imagine your life without electricity? ‘
    Yes, and it was far better that you might expect. Until age of 14 only electricity I practically knew was a ‘cat whiskers’ and at 14 it was an old car battery and single valve radio, and subsequently half a dozen summers back to the nights of ‘petroleum’ lamps and sky with thousands upon thousands of twinkling stars.
    People living without electricity are far more resourceful and organized than most of modern townies.

    • In Tajikistan, the poorest of the former Soviet Republics, at this time of year the electricity is on for two hours in the morning and two more in the evening. That may drop to one hour twice a day in mid winter.

      There is a big aluminum smelter that must be kept going 24/7, however. It uses a vast amount of power. Foreign investments must be protected, right? The smelter is owned by a group in the Cayman Islands. Can you guess who owns that company? Go on…guess!

      • That should be an easy one, Rusal and Oleg Deripaska, I’m guessing since in town near my birthplace was once prospered aluminium ‘combinat’ and now half decrepit smelter, majority share sold to O.D. by local ****** government, who promptly destroyed it since it was too much of a competition, I’m sure you come across ‘them’ before.

      • Interesting aside – thanks, Crispin.
        Wikipedia has a report on this, quoting the Economist-
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tajik_Aluminium_Company
        Apparently uses 40 percent of the country’s electric and the beneficial owner seems to be the president, working through a nominee company in BVI.
        This country has a vote in the UN and currently has 10 accredited delegates in Katowice

  6. It’s all about eschatology, which is a simply the excuse for political and/or religious control
    of the masses as the path to power and wealth for the “chosen ones.”

  7. I’ll think you’ll find ‘scarify’ doesn’t *exactly* mean what you think it means.
    It is the sort of linguistic trick that I love playing amongst but, try a little harder.
    Scramble the spellchecker. Invent new words
    I’ll say 8 out of 10 for effort. Nice try

    Came upon a documentary ‘thing’ some while ago. Something to do with ‘poor people’ in various cities around the world and basically a camera followed them around for a ‘typical’ week in their lives.
    The guy I remember was a refuse collector in a very large SE Asian city.
    He had a wheelbarrow and a sweeping brush. Period.
    He lived in an assemblage of corrugated steel sheet, tarpaulin and cardboard along a dead-end street that ‘rich’ city folks used as a dumping ground.
    It made Skid Row look like Birdcage Walk in London
    He earned pennies to cover a fixed ’round’, different each day of the week and his ‘contract’ was to finish the round – no matter how many hours it took to do it.
    Every last one of his pennies went on buying a large sack of rice once per month.
    He was allowed to pick ‘good stuff’ from the trash. That covered luxuries like a bowl of noodles or some pi55 poor fish soup occasionally.
    I forgot. He did have a Yellow Jacket.

    He was THE most alert, bright-eyed, quick witted, hospitable & helpful and intelligent guy I have *ever* seen on UK television.
    He was relentlessly cheerful and bright, he doted on his wife, she doted on him, the 3 kids were a picture of good manners and he kept this up despite being relentlessly abused by the folks whose houses he went round collecting trash.

    His friends numbered in hundreds – REAL people, not shadows and ghosts in a computer and not stressed out his head by an overwhelming bureaucracy.

    He and his family were happy.

    Are you?

    I’d venture ‘no’ by the simple fact that you’re here reading this junk.

    So perleeeeeeeeze, try a little empathy, respect and manners while throwing around accusations like ‘Grinding poverty’ and ‘Short brutish lives’

    • Hum: So the wife has managed 3 pregnancies and births successfully. Without expensive medical help? What impact did this have one the supply of rice and noodles for the family.
      By the way, do they have any electricity in their suburban shanty? What was the fee from the television company? Perhaps 2 years income. That would certainly have made me happy considering the (limited) future security it provided against the potential future illness of the children.
      Sorry Peta, but when you are happy to live for a month on a bag of rice and some piss poor fish soup and raise three children I might be more impressed.

    • Dear Peta of Newark,
      That would be Newark N.J. I assume, you have a choice, you can choose to live in rat-infested rubbish dump or in a warm comfortable house with mod-cons TV and computer powered by e-l-e-c-t-r-i-c-i-t-y.
      You have chosen the latter, are you implying that choice should not be available to everyone?

      • Hi, Peta of not NJ
        I also recall being impressed by a roadsweeper – in Baghdad, just before the Gulf War of 91.
        He and his broom were doggedly adhering to their task in the middle lane of a three lane expressway/6-lane dualway in the morning rush hour. Cars. trucks, and Steven Spielberg tankers, nose-to-tail at 50mph, all constantly switching between the narrow lanes without warning. The guy was completely oblivious to the mayhem around him. I didn’t even want to DRIVE on that road. Probably he loved his family. Maybe he still lives, maybe not. His clothes were the same dusty colour as the grey concrete of the barriers and of the road itself. He didn’t have a yellow vest.

    • Peta,
      Yes, he’s surviving.
      Precariously.
      Should one or two things go wrong, injury, health or other, he perishes.

      As delighted as he may be with his current status, I’m sure he’d be happier if he was a little more secure in his future existance.

    • as touching as that story is, why makes you think his and his families lives won’t be short? Just because he is thankful and “happy” for what little he has, what makes you think his life isn’t hard (or “brutish”)? He and his family are surviving, just barely. It won’t take much (a simple illness, an injury, loss of what little income he has, an naturally occurring major storm, etc) to change that in a heartbeat.

  8. each successive climate report and news release must be more scarifying than any predecessors

    Ah….

    scarify verb (1)
    scar·​i·​fy | \ˈsker-ə-ˌfī
    \
    scarified; scarifying
    Definition of scarify

    (Entry 1 of 2)

    transitive verb

    1 : to make scratches or small cuts in (something, such as the skin) scarify an area for vaccination

    2 : to lacerate the feelings of

    3 : to break up, loosen, or roughen the surface of (something, such as a field or road)

    4 : to cut or soften the wall of (a hard seed) to hasten germination

    scarify verb (2)
    scarified; scarifying

  9. This is the underlying reason for pushing AGW “…must make “unprecedented changes in all aspects of society,” spend $40 trillion by 2035….”. There are many very wealthy people who have invested billions of their money to bait the hook as they try to catch this 2 trillion dollar per year fish. Nice job if the fish can be caught.

  10. Re. the USA “National Climate Assement” is probably one of the US agencies with its original Öbama era head”on it, I would have thought tht Pres.Trump could have at least Tweeted that they were not a indication of his or the US Govts. thinking.

    Whilst I wish that the “World”is waking up to the nonsense of Climate change, come to Australia, a once very rich country, and see what is happening, with both parties afraid of telling the public the truth. That this Summer we may well see Brownouts or total blackouts in the States of at last Victoria and South Australia.

    Perhaps sadly the mainly “White”Anglo Saxon people are very slow to anger, unlike the people of France.

    MJE

    • He’s made it clear with tweets and other messaging that he doesn’t believe the NCA. The press pilloried him for saying he was too smart to believe the report. Perhaps he should have said that he was not stupid enough to believe the report.

    • But what about that National Climate Assessment? Wasn’t that a Trump White House document? It certainly needed some adult supervision, to ride herd on the 1,000 Deep State scientists and bureaucrats who prepared it. However, the White House let them prove how loony climate alarmism has become.

      That paragraph is inspired. Maybe the idea was to eliminate all WH influence and show the country what these loons would write. It isn’t an assessment of the National Climate, but a self assessment of the credibility of the many authors.

  11. “Not to be outdone, the 1,700-page 2018 US National Climate Assessment wailed that failure to eliminate fossil fuels and roll back American industry and living standards ” ?

    ONLY American industry and living standards ” ?

    Things that make ya hmmmmm….

  12. If the natural component to warming is 0.9 deg C per century, how is it possible to limit warming to 1.5 deg C?

    But I digress. The figure of $2.4 Trillion per year is just a scare number, so that when you’re later given the option to make $500 Billion in annual transfer payments per year instead, that it sounds like a bargain.

    What’s interesting is that people are proposing to spend $2.4 Trillion a year, but corporate money is supposedly lined up AGAINST it. Like, energy companies and utilities all stand to lose money if governments go on a collective drunken infrastructure spending spree.

  13. People looking out of their windows and realizing that all that “unprecedented climate and weather chaos” isn’t actually happening is becoming an ever greater problem for the Warmistas. People notice immediately, however, when their wallets start to be drained in the interests of some unsupported speculation. People in underdeveloped countries to not need ‘Climate Cash’, they want the ability to develop their economies just as people did in the West, through their own education and initiative. Slowly the tide is turning against the Warmistas as people wake up and realise that they are being played as fools in the interests of an unelected Elite.

    • “People in underdeveloped countries to not need ‘Climate Cash’, they want the ability to develop their economies just as people did in the West, through their own education and initiative.”
      — If they had such economic freedom in the first place, they wouldn’t be afflicted with such low living standards. The people may want opportunity, but their governments want cash. The is a pivot coming. Nobody thinks that the West is going to spend $2.4 Trillion on year. The idea is to use that number as a reference point so that the wealth transfers feel like a bargain. Once those are set up as an annuity, they might be hard to stop, even long after the original reasons have been debunked.

    • That is priceless. They are next to the COAL Museum.
      It is cold and snowing, and they are staying warm and powering the propaganda distribution using DIESEL Generators!!!
      The hypocrisy is epic. Does no one there even have a reference frame for reality.

  14. With America likely being joined soon by Brazil in rejecting the Paris climate trap, poor nations are on firm ground. Ontario (Canada), Poland. Australia, China, India and other countries have also rejected carbon taxes and coal use restrictions.

    And good old NZ has an Emissions Trading Scheme, “ETS” Its quite subtle in that it simply taxes the supplier’s output. Oops not a tax though as I found out when I queried a few government departments about how much was in the “ETS” fund and were there any public accounts and other information available.
    It seems that the suppliers are supposed to use the LEVY to purchase carbon credits.

    Anyway I could find very little about it. http://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/new-zealand-emissions-trading-scheme/about-nz-ets contemptiously sent me a flyer which described the scheme and how, as it was not a tax, it had nothing to do with the government!

    https://www.epa.govt.nz/industry-areas/emissions-trading-scheme/ is “helpful” but as you can see, the government is not involved (joke)

    Looking around, I cant find any non government administration of ETS as I found when looked a few years ago. For instance http://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/new-zealand-emissions-trading-scheme/nz-ets-and-new-zealands-provisional-carbon

    Typical New Zealanders though. We are being stiffed by LEVYS on Electricity, Cement, Steel making, Electricity and fuel, and because its invisible to the public, (Who end up footing the bill), no one is complaining – YET!

    Cheers

    Roger

    • Roger

      From what I can gather from Jo Nova’s presentation for the GWPF in London last week (for which I had a ticket but couldn’t attend) Australia is most certainly the crash test dummy for the global renewables project. I would Include Scotland as well but they are heartily bailed out by the the rest of the UK.

      It seems clear that Aus. is sleepwalking into a real crisis. I’m not sure if you guys in NZ are quite as committed, I hope not.

      • we do seem to be the crash test dummy for any stupid idea someone want to use a small compliant population to run experiments on
        the RFID tagging con for supposed food safety is one such
        usa idea to flog useless un needed tags to a nation without herd issues or CJD or any valid excuse for such
        we protested but your lobbysists do a seriously questionable hard sell it seems
        note that YOU in usa still dont have this crap cos your farmlobby had more pushback.
        so bad here now even a single PET sheep is suposed to be tagged and property ID’d and trackable.
        cows then sheep now goats pigs
        chooks willl be next!
        Teslas stupid battery high cost little value and ongoing huge costs.
        whatever idiocy someone in silicon valley comes up with..its jigh odds theyll flog it to Aus pdq
        the mygov health scams another such
        theyre being very very careful NOT mentioning its an OS program and corp supplying the program
        and that the info supposedly stripped of id( HA HA) can be datamined by pharmas n others to “enhance” it (and their profits)
        smartmeters! theyve pushed our service supply charges up by over 80$au a quarter already in a few yrs many hundreds of the older/ disabled /light duties meter readers lost their jobs
        the consumers benefit is? ZERO

      • “It seems clear that Aus. is sleepwalking into a real crisis.”

        I think that is a real good way of putting it. Austrailia’s politicians seem totally oblivious to the harm they are doing to their country.

        Unfortunately, Australia’s politicians are not alone in the world. There are many leaders who seem to be sleepwalking when it comes to CO2. All this based on absolutely zero evidence that CAGW is real.

        It’s a pretty bad situation when most of the politicians in the Western world are so deluded about the effects of CO2 that they take actions harmful to the people they represent.

        If politicians want to insist that CO2 is a problem for humanity then they should be required to provide the evidence they use to reach that conclusion. They should have to justify turning the world upside down before we actually do it.

  15. It was never going to be a quick death but a long and slow one , for there are far to many with too much invested in AGW to allow it to occur another way. But the signs have been there for some years for across the world climate doom has been a known issue with any politician wanting to get into office. And when you consider that rule one is ‘get elected ‘ and rule to is ‘stay elected ‘ they you can only conclude that must be because the voters themselves do not hold it as something they care much about. Given its was always a political game, hence the nature of the IPCC, rather than a science-driven issue. Once the political wind started to come out of its sails it was dead in the water .

  16. In Africa alone, twice as many people as live in the USA still do not have electricity, or have it only rarely and unpredictably. Can you imagine your life without electricity?

    To the question, Yes I can. Both parents grew up on rural farms and were young adults during the Great Depression. My two older brothers were not born in hospitals. I remember our family’s first car, first refrigerator, and first TV. We talked to an operator to make a phone call, and had to run next door to tell old lady X to hang her phone up so a call could be made.

    The quote above, and much else, implies that nations have to be electrified all at once and by massive outside funding. How different that is from the way cities and towns in the USA were electrified. There is an interesting history to all this, and interesting contrast in the development of the societies.

  17. I’m afraid most people don’t even know about the data and a fair percentage don’t want to know. Religious fanatics are like that and to wake them up to the REAL data about cold deaths, SLR, deaths from extreme events, lack of snow, the slow warming from the coldest period in the last 10,000 years i.e the LIA, Antarctica not losing ice, Greenland cooling until the 1990s and since little signs of their CAGW, WELL you’ve got a lot of work to do.
    The sceptics have won the argument but most people have no idea at all. This is not an argument about so called CAGW, but is an argument about proper data and evidence and somehow educating people enough that they START to understand it.
    And that’s just beginning.

  18. Poland pulls a fast one on IPCC ‘climate alarmist’ guests: A great read in American Thinker this week… the Poles slapped back hard by displaying COAL all over the conference!

    “In addressing the delegates in his opening remarks, Polish President Andrzej Duba said Poland has no plans to give up coal. And why would it? Poland has the highest coal production in Europe and employs about 100,000 people in its mining industry. And coal supplies Poland with approximately 80% of its energy needs.
    The Polish Coal Miners band, dressed in smart black uniforms and wearing traditional mines caps, struck up a tune as confused-looking delegates arrived at the convention center in Katowice, a city in the heart of Poland’s coal mining country.

    Coal was proudly displayed in cases around the convention pavilion. Coal, fashioned in jewelry, was for sale. A coal-based cosmetic company even touted products that it claimed would treat ‘both body and soul.’ https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/12/poland_trolls_the_global_environmentalists_at_un_climate_meeting.html&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwibscHE_pjfAhUp5IMKHQ8wB0MQFggFMAA&client=internal-uds-cse&cx=016417505616455789357:mttpazkfree&usg=AOvVaw0XaVWA1spCEhRZ9TPDxVLs

    • Thanks for the good laugh, CC. 🙂

      Those delegates will have created some new memories to share.thanks to Poland coal

      I don’t know that they will be pleasant memories, but they will be new.

  19. “Not to be outdone, the 1,700-page 2018 US National Climate Assessment wailed that failure to eliminate fossil fuels and roll back American industry and living standards would send global temperatures soaring 15 degrees F by 2100! Chaos and food shortages would ensue; US economic growth would plummet.”

    Yeah, about that — here’s my amateur attempt to address that seeming work of fiction:

    https://hubpages.com/politics/Fourth-National-Climate-Assessment-Things-You-Should-Know-About-Its-Creation

  20. The Island of Vanuatu has decided that the most productive thing they can do is take legal action against countries that use coal and other fossil fuels, and get money out of them.

    ‘The Pacific island nation of Vanuatu has called for a new “loss and damage fund” to ensure payments from rich, industrialised nations go to those most affected by climate disasters.

    “The idea of taxing the fossil fuel industry is an economically sensible approach, and a moral approach,” said Vanuatu’s foreign minister, Ralph Regenvanu.

    Before the talks, Vanuatu announced it would explore taking legal action against fossil fuel companies and countries for their role in causing climate change.

    Loss and damage compensation has always been a sticking point at U.N. climate talks.”

    https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/katowice-cop24-notebook–negotiators-face-draft-text-deadline-11021700

    Isn’t that normally referred to as blackmail, or something like that?

    • I will believe Vanuata has a case against the use of fossil fuel when Vanuata uses no fossil fuels itself.

      No ships.
      No cars.
      No trucks.
      No tractors.
      No chain falls.
      No cranes.
      No forklifts.
      No airplanes.
      No boats.
      No polyethylene ropes, nets, or bands.
      No nylon, no plastics, no hot water.
      No soap, no cleaners, nothing but PV cells and hand-wrung hemp fibers.
      No steel, no concrete, no gravel, no copper.
      No clothes, no thread, no zippers, no hooks.

      • No cars.
        No boats.
        No clothes

        What if they use electric cars, sailboats and clothes made from the fibers of local vegetation or the skins of the animals they killed to eat?

    • Have a look at the maps of New Hebrides, sorry Vanuatu, and ask how many billionaires just happen to have beachfront properties.
      Follow the money trail…. the whole way from melanesia right to Katowice!

  21. People never vote to reduce their own prosperity. Gilets Jaune in France, Belgium, and the Netherlands, yet another example.

    Any sort of extra tax on fuel, will produce the same result. Washington State, as progressive as progressive gets, has rejected a Carbon Tax yet again.

    Until it is obvious to all that Prosperity actually is dangerous to our future, and I assure you that there is no proof whatsoever of this, it will never be voted Yes, except in Germany where a consensus guilt trip is in action, Hello, Hitler? WWII? Holocaust? These people attempt expiation by virtue-signalling, except, on an issue that is wholly unrelated…

  22. I need to rant. Related to fossil fuels-coal mining in Poland, and oil/fuels in the US: The MARS tv show is so extreme in hitting viewers over the head each week- a colonist story interspersed with various real scientists and warmest authors pushing globalism above all (to control those evil corporations). We see a hapless arctic resident who sadly tells us of coming death and destruction, mixing up both climate warming shrinking the icepack, releasing anthrax trapped in dead deer and SOMEHOW oil companies are to blame for just being there within 50 miles! Blame is placed on fuel companies each episode. Nat Geo channel had a great idea to interest the public in the new hot space topic…’living on Mars’ but it created an unrealistic story line, and went full throttle on politics. Every episode so far presents radical left ideology, clips of Obama pontificating, Trump acting ‘the fool’ in his ignorance, and sober claims of total destruction..coming NOW, it just never ends!! The story itself is ‘good & pure science’ vs the ‘evil corporate overlords’ just digging away and using “drill baby drill” dialogue guaranteed to p*ss off even the most indifferent greenie. The Paris Accord rules above all, etc. Not sure I can watch another episode… this episode: “Trump at war with life on earth” yeah, yada, seriously….

  23. Germany has already spent the first trillion on renewables. The results are one the highest electricity prices in Europe, and barely any dent in CO2 emissions. Meanwhile France has half the prices and a fraction of the emissions, thanks to nuclear. Ignoring such real-world evidence is the hallmark of a huge scam, nothing else.

    https://www.electricitymap.org/?page=country&solar=false&remote=true&wind=false&countryCode=DE
    https://www.electricitymap.org/?page=country&solar=false&remote=true&wind=false&countryCode=FR
    https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Electricity_price_statistics

  24. This has nothing to do with climate change, it is a protest over being taxed to death by the political elite.

    It is the same old story told a thousand times throughout history. Doesnt matter if it is a king, a queen, a government, a despot.

    Jefferson said we need a revolution every 20 years to keep the political class on their toes. About time we had a global revolt of the white working and middle classes, who have been shafted by the system to breaking point.

  25. I don’t believe that humans have caused the recent warming and also believe that the planet was much warmer than now a number of times in the past and that this current warming is nothing unusual. I just watched a fascinating talk from both sides of the debate and there was one thing which i want to ask about here. There was a guy called Patrick Moore who showed lots of graphs showing temperature over the past thousands/millions of years and he said that the the holocene optimum was warmer than today. Michael Mann then countered this by claiming that according to scientific literature, when reconstructing past temperature patterns, we can only go back about 40000 years when going back on century by century timescales to actually reconstruct temperatures on the same timescale that global warming is occuring today. He then said if you look at the leading science journals, the estimates of temperature over that timeframe show that the recent warming is unprecedented as far back as we can go and that putting up 40 year old graphs based on data that would laughed out of the scientific conference today if you tried to present them, really does a disservice to this discussion because it isn’t true that the holocene optimum was warmer than today, but what we now understand is that the change in the earth’s orbit relative to the sun has a different influence upon temperatures in the summer and the winter and the scientists that produced the graphs 40 years ago that showed the holocene optimum being warmer than today were only looking at half the year. He said if you look at the whole globe, both summer and winter, what you find is that those temperatures were not as warm as today. He says temperatures today as warm as we are able to reconstruct, as far back as we are able to go with these sorts of reconstructions. Would love to know people’s thoughts on this. Is Mr Mann correct or is Patrick Moore correct?

  26. Wow. Adam, either the website cut off all further comments, or you stumped the band. It’s 3 days and only crickets. C’mon fellas, give the man an answer!

Comments are closed.