UN Panic Button: Mass Extinctions By 2100 Even with Paris Agreement Climate Pledges

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to the United Nations, waiting until the end of 2020 is not an option, the crisis has to be addressed now.

U.N. warns world not doing nearly enough to avert climate catastrophe

UPDATED ON: NOVEMBER 26, 2019 / 8:23 AM / CBS/AP

Geneva — Countries have procrastinated for too long and need to begin making steep cuts to their greenhouse gas emissions immediately, or risk missing agreed targets for limiting , a senior United Nations official said Tuesday. The appeal by Inger Andersen, who heads the U.N. Environment Program, came days before governments gather in Madrid for an annual climate change meeting.

We need quick wins to reduce emissions as much as possible in 2020,” Andersen said, as her agency published its annual “emissions gap” report showing the amount of planet-heating gases being pumped into the atmosphere hitting a new high last year, despite a near-global pledge to reduce them.

Current national pledges would leave the world 5.8 Fahrenheit warmer by 2100 than pre-industrial times, with dramatic consequences for life on Earth, the U.N. agency said, adding that getting the world back on track to limit the increase to 2.7 degrees (1.5 Celsius) would require a fivefold increase in measures pledged so far.

Even if the current pledges are met, the U.N. said it “would cause mass extinctions” and leave “large parts of the planet uninhabitable” by 2100.

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/climate-change-greenhouse-gas-emissions-un-warming-dangerous-level-by-2100-without-major-changes-2019-11-26/

This latest warning is a follow on from UNEP’s 1989 warning that entire nations would be wiped off the face of the Earth if CO2 emissions were not brought under control by the year 2000.

Advertisements

125 thoughts on “UN Panic Button: Mass Extinctions By 2100 Even with Paris Agreement Climate Pledges

    • While the UN calls her an environmentalist – –

      from wikipedia
      Inger Andersen (environmentalist)
      ” … MA degree from the School of Oriental and African Studies at University of London, with a specialisation in development studies focusing on economics and development

      – – this is just more proof that this is not about the atmosphere. They want other people’s money.

      • Money? That’s all your mind can imagine. She wants power that no amount of money can buy. Totalitarian power over people and societies.

        Since it’s a emergency. Why not a totalitarian administration?

        • Totalitarian puppet administration serving their masters the ‘money’ printers(wizards) in the Temple.
          Every time a politician is talking about freedom he means direct tax slaves. Freedom not snow is a thing of the past.

        • This is absolutely true. These people are really not looking for money, be sure to understand that, they are wanting to harness as much power over people as possible, just like Jose is saying, for once their totalitarian power grab is done, they can have all the money in the world, and whatever else riches they might want, and the people outside of this inner circle, which means pretty much 80% or more, will be nothing but slaves in this scenario. Just look at the history, it’s there, has happened before, and they are now attempting to do it again. The time is right too, most of the millennials and their parents are too young to understand this, or just too stupid, or both. And we have people like Soros, who has a personal ax to grind, for starters, he wants to destroy America, but he’s done a pretty good job in Europe as well. His Open Society Foundations bankrolls these idiots to do his dirty work, and one of his almost trademark weapons is the climate change! Using it, he’s scaring people to no end, somehow, him, and people like him needs to be stopped.

        • No, power grab. They will not be content with all the money being “pledged” they want to form an unelected world govt. under the legal immunity of the UN.

          They know the wheels are coming off this project, that is the reason for all the “urgency”.

          • We already have an unelected world govt. Those who create ‘money’ out of thin air inflating away its value into toilet paper.

            They call it stimulating the economy.

          • Sommer. (Attention non – Canadian readers. Some of the information posted below may cause physical pain and frustration.)
            And did you see the ridiculous headline interviews last night on CTV? Here’s one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wU6bWbGLQnk. I sensed our new Minister of the Environment, Jonathan Wilkinson, was very nervous fielding ridiculous questions from the brainless pit bull interviewer about Canada’s progress in the battle against the “climate crisis”. (Who wouldn’t be, in his unenviable position? ) “Let’s see. Do I keep my job, or do I scream Boolschist!!!! at the top of my lungs”? I’m not a fan of Trudeau, but I’m starting to think these people may not actually believe CAGW exists. A huge percentage of voters on all sides do, though. I used to think our government controlled the CBC and CTV, now I’m not so sure. Maybe it’s the other way around. CBC recently requires people to post their real names in its comments sections. No more pseudonyms. So no comments from people whose anonymity is important to them.
            Some positive news from Canada, though. Ontario Energy Minster Greg Rickford suggested that all sides of the AGW argument should be heard, and stated that one of his favourite blogs was Climate Change Dispatch. (Now there’s a dangerous radical blog. Not). He’s predictably getting ripped to shreds for his temerity. Oh, BTW, Ontario Premier Doug Ford is being sued by young Ontarians for cancelling $231 million in green projects. (Something about those pesky farmers complaining about turbines and solar panels replacing their agricultural livelihoods.) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/greg-rickford-climate-change-blog-1.5373963

      • funniest part of all this….

        The countries that would be the most affected….are all the ones that are increasing their emissions

    • It’s going to get interesting trying to justify all the expense and emergency need to reduce CO2 when drastic cold/snow/ice becomes the norm. Imagine trying to justify reducing CO2 to *increase* warming.

  1. They must have forgotten that the world is going to end in 2030. They have trouble keeping their fear mongering stories straight.

    • There is no prediction on the end of the world by 2030. The 2030 deadline is for “decisive” action to prevent that 0.5C increase that will kill all coral in the oceans. That simply means everyone living above the poverty line are required to give their “excess wealth” to the UN dictators so they can distribute it, after their admin charges, to the dictators of impoverished nations so they can live in the splendour they are accustomed to.

    • This latest warning is a follow on from UNEP’s 1989 warning that entire nations would be wiped off the face of the Earth if CO2 emissions were not brought under control by the year 2000.

      Well that one is true. Where is Atlantis ? No one even knows where used to be any more.

      I’m sure that large parts of the world will ( still ) be uninhabitable if we don’t reduce emissions.

  2. The UN could relax a little if they turned into WUWT once in a while.
    Per Moncton Posting:
    Given 1.04 K reference warming from doubled CO2https://edberry.com/blog/climate-physics/agw-hypothesis/a-simple-explanation-of-the-new-climate-science/?__s=jc4ek9zzrafruwqfxcen

  3. What he means is Old Testament. Real wrath of God type stuff. Fire and brimstone. Rivers and seas boiling.

    At least Dan Ackroyd knew he was joking when he said that.

  4. If global warming, Sorry I mean climate change affects the whole planet, then why does the u.n. lie when they say – ” and leave large parts of the planet uninhabitable” by 2100

    Surely if co2 is so evil that it can blanket the whole planet, then why will only certain parts of the planet suffer from weather changes? I am not the most educated person on the planet, but I still can see the blatant discrepancies of their statements…

    • Large parts of the planet uninhabitable?

      You mean I won’t be able to live in the sea anymore? How about at the poles? Sustainable lifestyle in the desert? Top of mountain ranges?

      My dream has been stolen. How Dare You!?

    • They have been predicting more droughts/desertification without any observable corroboration – in fact the Earth is greening from the increase in CO₂ – so no areas will become “uninhabitable” except the expected inundation of some lowlands as icefields continue to melt as they always do in an interglacial period.
      The obvious corollary to some land being lost to a warmer climate is that some previously uninhabitable regions will become amenable to settlement.

      • What? You mean that Greenland might become as habitable as it was in 1,000 AD when the Vikings colonized it during the MWP?

    • Some nations such as Canada will be much more productive and wealthy with a little warming. I’m amused at Canadians being so concerned about potential for warming as if it will be the end of their world.

      • They should be worried. They’ll need to secure that long southern border first ! Before long they’ll be invaded by Mexican rapists.

    • Sunny

      What they mean is, the areas they designate as uninhabitable will be the areas all we proles will be herded to. The elite will get to live in all the nice areas, all alone.

  5. mass extinctions … planet uninhabitable by 2100.

    News at 11!

    Is Inger Andersen, head of the U.N. Environment Program, lying? Or is she just incompetent to the point of stupidity?

    • The UN wants to be the centralized world governing body and is trying to get there by controlling the economy by controlling the distribution of energy. Fossil fuels are the biggest source of energy and UN has not been able to control their distribution.

    • Pat
      These alarmists certainly come across as being a few bricks short of a full load. I think the appropriate word is “hysteria.”

    • Perhaps I could sell one of my bridges to these folks who insist they think the world will be ending in 12 years. They sure are a gullible lot. I think they are both exaggerating, lying and being incompetent to the point of stupidity, because it aligns with a lot of their strategies for everything else they are trying to implement with Agenda 21.

      Unfortunately, a lot of the gullible masses has also bought into the hype, doom and gloom. Stuff like this sells, perhaps because some of humanity have a propensity for the gene responsible for the world is always ending sometime soon. And then the hucksters take over and start selling it, so as it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy for these doomsters whose world is always ending sometime soon. It is literally one of the oldest stories in the Book, from all over the world throughout all history.

    • I would opt for lying these days. They do it so often that I think allowing them to be ignorant or incompetent is too easy.

    • Yes, indeed we were, Mark – IIRC, from a lethal combination of: Ice Age onset; Population Bomb; Peak Oil; Nuclear War; Cancer Pandemic (caused by man made chemicals).

      I’ve probably missed a few…

      • I remember the Thanksgiving of 1959 when we didn’t have any cranberries because there was supposed to be some cancer-causing chemical in them. Now, 60 years later we hear nothing about that scare.

        I wonder how long it will take for the AGW scare to slip into oblivion?

      • The scare of the man-made cancer pandemic has been told in studious detail by author Edith Efron in ‘The Apocalyptics” a paperback of some 800 pages. It is near-essential reading for those who wish to understand the mechanisms and motivations of these people, who are and we’re mostly scientists appointed by government departments, exposed to advertising dollars. The hook covers the end of the scare, marked in my reading by several of the main players turning from the scare side to the “we were wrong” side. Like the global warming weak link that CO2 is a control knob, the cancer scare had it’s weak link. It was undue reliance on animal tests as a predictor of human response to treatment and disease.
        I cannot recommend this book more highly. Geoff S

        • If we’re into recommendations, two that I believe are essential reading are:
          Factfulness, by Hans Rosling, and more recently, The Green Reich, by Drieu Godefridi.

          And if there is anyone still left that doesn’t know Donna Laframboise, do click on the ‘No Frakking Consensus’ link on the sidebar.

  6. The urgency the “UN” pushes has more to do with eradicating capitalism and individual freedom, before mother nature proves the lie of human induced catastrophic climate change. The climate is a nonlinear chaotic system, the future states of which are impossible to predict.

    • When the MSM supports this nonsense it’s difficult if near impossible to turn the corner on truth. Only time will tell under these circumstances and that’s what they’re counting on.

    • Even these self important, narcissistic dimwits can see the actual reality looming which is that there is a well established global cooling in the democracies of the world to their globalist dictatorship ambitions and they also realise that the thugocracies just snicker at them behind their backs. That is what all this desperate orchestrated hysteria is all about.

      Here in Oz you should listen to the drivel about our bushfires being all but totally due to climate change. Similar to California I suppose and the reality also similar, econut nimby’s shutting down precautionary burning to reduce fuel load for years and decades and its now literally blowing up in their faces.

      • yeah dragging out the 2009 Vic fire deaths yet again on abc.
        even with proven and jailed firebugs some shiela wrote a book and is pretty hot on blaming the power cos, entirely.
        and Vic at least does have pretty serious treelopping and maintenance schedules
        but people who live in small towns totally surrounded by bloody overgrown Nat Parks and also so “into nature” they have trees right up to the houses, and everything in the garden a nice native(aka fireball)
        council n stste regs making cutting anything native down a performance and cost excersise only the seriously determined can be bothered with..

        anyone ever seen just how fast shadecloth goes up? btw?
        had a bit stuck on my linetrimmer and i used the ciggy lighter to remove it
        whoo hoo .

        and we Aussies adore the stuff for shade n windbreaks all round our homes oops

  7. This entire UN emissions reduction panic is a complete fraud.
    In the year 2007 the world’s developing nations achieved majority control of global energy use and emissions and that majority has continued to climb unabated since that year.
    As of 2018 these nations are accountable for about 60% of all global energy use and two thirds of global emissions with these numbers climbing to about 70% and three fourths respectively by year 2050.
    Furthermore these year 2050 forecasts were based on continued developing nation government mandated use of renewables which has now been replaced with these nations now targeting priority commitments to increase use of fossil fuels while backing down on renewables.
    The UN has pushed developed nations to sacrifice and impose emissions reductions when these actions have no hope of making any meaningful reduction in global emissions that will climb ever upward regardless of what steps the developed nations might take.
    The UN undertook this entire emissions reduction campaign to obtain trillions of dollars from the developed nations to somehow bribe the developing nations to back off use of fossil fuels.
    That boat had sailed on this politically contrived extortion scheme and the developing nations know it.
    The world will continue to see significantly increasing use of fossil fuels driven by the developing nations. Fortunately the climate change impacts from this energy use will be small and tolerable unlike the phony and incompetently calculated outcomes pushed by the UN that are based on nothing but flawed and failed computer models that are rigged to produce these absurd results for purely political purposes.

  8. Seems more like they’re scared that the global warming industry will collapse before they have time to rake in their profits and convert the world to socialism.

  9. Quote:

    “Major societal and economic transformations need to take place in the next decade to make up for the inaction of the past,” the Tuesday emissions gap report said…”.

    Translation: The world must go Marxist, and must start doing it now.

  10. When the BBC began headlining this report, their environment puppy on the TV news began tapping about the unsustainable rise of CO2 over the years. “Watch this”, I said to my inamorata: “He will produce a graph showing the increase of greenhouse gases but not a corresponing line showing the temperature rise – because there hasn’t been one”.

    Sure enough, despite much grave nodding from the anchor, no temperature data was provided.

    Anyway, here’s the thing. If it’s true that not even all the nations keeping to their Paris Agreement pledges can avert catastrophe – then President Trump was dead right in pulling the United States out of it, wasn’t he?

    Meanwhile, early winter snowstorms are said to be heading for the American mid-West and Europe is bracing for an Arctic blast in the next week or so. This is not going to end well for the walarmists. . .

  11. the amount of planet-heating gases being pumped into the atmosphere hitting a new high last year, despite a near-global pledge to reduce them

    Funny how people don’t want to stop driving their cars and heating their homes in winter. I mean, they’ve been told often enough that disaster will happen if they don’t give up fossil fuels. Here comes the UN (“this time we REALLY mean it”) to reinforce the message, and nobody will actually do anything.

    Curious, when “Just say no” worked so well for drugs and sex.

  12. I have been pushed past the point where I can accept or allow these “climate change “environmentalists”” any degree of credibility whatsoever. From new ice age predictions, through mass starvation and disease to, what I’ll, sarcastically, call global melting (including rock). Even through the medieval warm period (warmer than now) and the little ice age (definitely colder than now), we’re still here. I learned in history class that during the little ice age, the Thames River froze hard enough, and long enough, that it could be used as a road from London, inland. Considering that a 1,500 pound horse, with its four hooves, has about the same foot area as we have with our two feet, the pounds per square inch is a lot. So the Thames River ice must have been thick and strong. I don’t know how far brackish water gets toward London, but considering how salt lowers the freezing temperature of water, that might be another factor to add to the ice thickness.

  13. So it seems that the only solution is for the US and Europe to stop everything?
    And give everything left to developing nations.
    Would all the leftie/greenies please lead by example and stop their use of fossil fuels immediately.
    If the crazies take control of the asylum then we will face extinction.

  14. But the IPCC does not know what they are talking about. They have been unable to determine a single value for the climate sensitivity of CO2. They have not narrowed down the number of climate models that are purely based on physics and chemistry without parameterization which is not physical. They have yet to determine how the climate system actually works. Their predictions have not come true so they do not really know what they are talking about. The reality is that the climate change that we have been experiencing is very small and is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale to support the conclusion that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero so even if we removed all of the CO2 from our atmosphere, the effort would have no effect on climate. This is all a matter of science.

    • “But the IPCC does not know what they are talking about. They have been unable to determine a single value for the climate sensitivity of CO2.”

      That’s right. Here this UN official is claiming temperatures will be 5.7F higher in 2100 if we don’t drastically reduce CO2, yet there is no evidence to back up this claim. Not one scientist at the IPCC can tell us how much net heat CO2 will add to the Earth’s atmosphere, yet here we are getting these over-the-top disaster predictions from the United Nations.

      There is a possibility that CO2 adds NO net heat to the atmosphere, after feedbacks are included. Chew on that, Mr. UN official.

      I guess with the next climate meeting in Madrid just around the corner, it is to be expected that the alarmists would turn the alarm up to 11, but the claims in this article are particularly ridiculous, and absolutely without any basis in fact.

  15. I like the reference to the 1989 prediction. What we don’t realize is that each year, without our noticing, several nations disappear and others take their place. We don’t know which ones, or where, but the predictions MUST always be true, simply because a Government Official said it!

  16. The key to their alarm rests on the Greenhouse Effect (GHE) and their “guess” on climate sensitivity. Let’s be clear — EVERYONE is guessing! There’s no clear-cut way to test their guesses. Skeptics guess on the low end. Dick Lindzen guessed it might be as low as 0.3C. One 2016 paper by an Alarmist guessed it might be as high as 13C per doubling of CO2. Even Gavin Schmidt couldn’t go that high.

    I used to be a fan of the GHE, for nearly 40 years. It makes a certain amount of sense. It was supposed to be why Earth is not frozen and why Venus is sizzling hot at the surface despite its high albedo.

    But even many of the skeptics ignore the very real possibility that the GHE does NOT apply at all.

    I challenge anyone to understand the following statement and to insist that the GHE is the significant force in baseline temperatures for Earth and Venus:

    The deeper the atmospheric column, the higher the temperature at the bottom of that column. The lapse rate does NOT stop working just because there is no GH gas!

    And on the flip side, if we insist that the difference between the effective temperature (T_e) and the actual surface temperature (T_0) is caused entirely by the GHE, we would need a CO2 climate sensitivity of 26.55C per doubling of CO2, and this truly would show up in the climate record, if it were true. With our Holocene CO2 increase from 180 ppm to 360 ppm, we most assuredly did not witness a temperature increase of 26.55C.

    My paper, “Thick atmosphere as a thermal reservoir,” explains this in more detail.

    • I suggest paleo climate reconstructions set a limit on how much warming anthropogenic CO2 could cause. For example, take the Cretaceous, 1700ppm CO2, 4C warmer. We’re never going to burn enough fossil fuel to produce an atmospheric CO2 level anything like 1700ppm.

    • The “greenhouse” effect is easily proven false. Each year the most powerful”greenhouse” gas cycles up and down over a wide range. For example in 2018 it ranged from 17mm in January up to 21.89 in July then cycled down again. The outgoing long wave radiation cycled in phase that is highly POSITIVELY correlated. This table provides the data from NASA satellites:
      Mnth TPW- OLR
      Jan 17.04 236.8
      Feb 17.29 236.5
      Mar 17.73 237.9
      Apr 18.19 238.7
      May20.40 240.6
      Jun 20.92 243
      Jul 21.89 243.9
      Aug 21.04 243.4
      Sep 20.54 242.2
      Oct 19.68 239.5
      Nov 18.93 237.1
      Dec 18.91 236.5
      As water vapour goes up OLR goes up. As water vapour comes down OLR comes down.
      https://1drv.ms/b/s!Aq1iAj8Yo7jNg0eoxeRHedx24wc5

      As the chart displays, the two variables are highly correlated and the range is not trivial.

      The “greenhouse” gas theory does not past this basic test – it is invalidated. It is a fairy tale for gullible adults and children alike.

  17. So let’s see these lying shameless idiots bastardizing science want to be our enelected, unaccountable leaders, hmmm can’t see what could go wrong with that. Always remeber if you want the worst possible outcome let the government take care of it!

  18. annual “emissions gap” report showing the amount of planet-heating gases being pumped into the atmosphere hitting a new high last year, despite a near-global pledge to reduce them.

    She then goes on to request five times as many pledges. Yup, let’s take something obviously not working and do five times as much of it. Simples.

  19. What the heck ever happened to good old honest begging?

    It used toe be, “Alms for the poor. Alms for the poor.”

    Now they are making up all sorts of cockamamie alms-begging excuses that warrant not a second thought whether to extend charity.

    These beggars are E-effen-squirrel-brained-OMG-butt-tootlin’-ice-cream-cone-meltin’ NUTS!

    Throw ’em an acorn and move on.

  20. I wonder if these UN alarmists lose sleep at night, pacing about, fretting over the inevitable catastrophes to come. I seriously doubt it.

  21. They have been predicting more droughts/desertification without any observable corroboration – in fact the Earth is greening from the increase in CO₂ – so no areas will become “uninhabitable” except the expected inundation of some lowlands as icefields continue to melt as they always do in an interglacial period.
    The obvious corollary to some land being lost to a warmer climate is that some previously uninhabitable regions will become amenable to settlement.

  22. If I didn’t know any better, I would think the Media are hyping up the climate story line in preparation of an upcoming world climate jamboree. I wonder how many freeloaders will attend this one?
    The BBC are now on full climate alarm mission, not a news bulletin passes by without the false pictures of disaster perfected by the David Attenborough school of sham reporting. Yesterdays was very impressive, we had fires in the Amazon, walrus and polar bears in danger of extinction, Paris climate agreement failures, Venice being flooded due to climate change and on it went.
    At some point when the snow has built up to the point they can’t actually get into the studio, they will start to reflect on their errors. Until then, we just have to sit back and play climate alarm bingo every time the news comes on and laugh. The BBC don’t fully realise, just how unexpectedly entertaining they have become.

  23. Ahhh well if we’re all going to die anyway we might as well make life comfortable with cheap coal fired power until then .

  24. Not sure why. The biggest increase in life , ever, on the planet was during the Cambrian period when for tens of millions years the CO2 levels were 15x today’s levels.

  25. The scare of the man-made cancer pandemic has been told in studious detail by author Edith Efron in ‘The Apocalyptics” a paperback of some 800 pages. It is near-essential reading for those who wish to understand the mechanisms and motivations of these people, who are and we’re mostly scientists appointed by government departments, exposed to advertising dollars. The hook covers the end of the scare, marked in my reading by several of the main players turning from the scare side to the “we were wrong” side. Like the global warming weak link that CO2 is a control knob, the cancer scare had it’s weak link. It was undue reliance on animal tests as a predictor of human response to treatment and disease.
    I cannot recommend this book more highly. Geoff S

  26. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/25/the-cia-documents-the-global-cooling-research-of-the-1970s/

    “The western world’s leading climatologists have confirmed recent reports of a detrimental global climate change. The stability of most nations is based upon a dependable source of food, but this stability will not be possible under the new climatic era. A forecast by the University of Wisconsin projects that the earth’s climate is returning to that of the neo-boreal era (1600- 1850) – an era of drought, famine and political unrest in the western world.

  27. “Countries have procrastinated for too long …” But what if procrastination turns out to have been the better response all along? The only way to tell for sure is to wait and see. Meanwhile, the planet is turning greener and the atmosphere perfectly models its own heat-engine performance for all to see.

  28. claims of Koala extinctions in Aus after the fires are utter crap
    yes the poor lil buggers have died/ been horribly burnt, as have so many other animals birds and farm animals too.
    curious thing they talked of culling populations of nsw and Kangaroo Island Koalas due to over crowding not so long ago
    and stuffed if I know how theyve managed the endangered tag either..
    theyre simply NOT.

  29. Just read the UN gap report end to end
    very interesting even if it is embarrassing to read, I would love to find the time to` extract` some direct quotes and re-lay them out, it would scare everybody that reads it to think that the UN had just written such stuff.
    I think it could be reduced slightly in length, probably down to about 1 (that`s `one`) page

  30. Predictability.

    For me Science is about predictability, making a testable statement.

    UNfortunately (UN is intentional) no one is taken to task for their failed predictions. I just re-read the Wattsup posting on failed predictions (https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/30/some-failed-climate-predictions/) .

    The fact that the media is not interested in challenging this group publishing these threats, provides a clear message of the media’s purpose.

  31. From the article: “Current national pledges would leave the world 5.8 Fahrenheit warmer by 2100 than pre-industrial times, with dramatic consequences for life on Earth, the U.N. agency said, adding that getting the world back on track to limit the increase to 2.7 degrees (1.5 Celsius) would require a fivefold increase in measures pledged so far.”

    Well, the UN and Obama gave China and India and the developing nations a pass on reducing their CO2 output, so they do not have to limit their CO2 production at all.

    The rest of the developed world is complying, more or less, with the Paris Climate Accord, although the compliance appears to be moving some nations towards bankruptcy, and even the United States, is reducing its CO2 output by switching from coal powerplants to natural gas powerplants.

    So my advice, if you think it is necessary to reduce CO2 output, is to negotiate with those nations who are unrestricted in their CO2 output. Tell China and India to cut back. No, that won’t happen. So, they are screwed.

    From the article: “Even if the current pledges are met, the U.N. said it “would cause mass extinctions” and leave “large parts of the planet uninhabitable” by 2100.

    Ridiculous !

    They make predictions like this even though they don’t have any idea how much net heat CO2 adds to Earth’s atmosphere. CO2 may add NO neat heat to the Earth’s atmosphere after feedbacks are included, and there is not one scientist on this planet that can prove otherwise at this time. So making a claim that the Earth’s temperature will be such and such is just so much speculation masquerading as facts.

    And to claim that CO2 will make the Earth uninhabitable is criminal given the anxiety some people are feeling over the climate change propagada, and given how little we actually know about this subject.

    This UN official is yelling “Fire!” in a theater when there is no fire, and no evidence of fire. Criminal. People are going to suffer because of this lie. Criminal.

  32. We hit record emissions for 2019 and will again in each of the next 5years, was that not the plan?

    I think Loydo, Griff and the UN were probably the only gullible ones who thought the plan involved any actual emission reduction 🙂

    • I’ve always wondered how these emissions per country are calculated. Do you think the UN knows about my 45 year old gasoline powered lawn mower? I could be in real trouble…

      • “Do you think the UN knows about my 45 year old gasoline powered lawn mower? I could be in real trouble…”

        They do now! 🙂

  33. The rise of every major civilization during the Holocene was marked by temperatures higher than current. Humans have no fur and sweat on all skin surfaces. We are clearly warm temperature creatures. The present climate research funding levels should be directed toward discovering what causes glacial periods and how we can predict the next one. That is the real threat, not increased growing seasons and agricultural production.

  34. For having such eminent psychologists on their team (who shall remain nameless to protect the guilty), the alarmists are flaming morons. Any first year psych major can tell you that hysterics and constant warnings of doom lead to people tuning you out completely. Instead of realizing this, the alarmists scream and run in circles faster and louder. This is the textbook definition of insanity. Honestly, letting the crazies continue with this may eventually result in them destroying themselves. Sadly, the children left with parents who don’t love them will end up depressed and may do themselves in, but there is not much one can do to fix that problem. Just hope the ignoring comes before the mass extinction of human intelligence arrives first.

  35. Aren’t fairly large parts of Earth uninhabitable? People aren’t flocking to Antarctica, Greenland and the Atacama. What exactly do they consider uninhabitable?

  36. “Current national pledges would leave the world 5.8 Fahrenheit warmer by 2100 than pre-industrial times, with dramatic consequences for life on Earth, the U.N. agency said, adding that getting the world back on track to limit the increase to 2.7 degrees (1.5 Celsius) would require a fivefold increase in measures pledged so far.”

    Nothing to contradict a 97% settled science producing evidence to tenths of centigrade and fahrenheit exactly.

    5.8° Fahrenheit, 1.5° Celsius with dramatic consequences for life on Earth!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *