Essay by Eric Worrall
The usual wailing and wild statements we’ve come to expect in the wake of the annual COP failure.
‘Weak tea’: Climate scientists push back against COP28 cheer
Washington (AFP) – A UN climate deal that approved a call to transition away from fossil fuels has been hailed as a major milestone and a cause for at least cautious optimism.
Issued on: 14/12/2023 – 02:41
…
Michael Mann … “The agreement to ‘transition away from fossil fuels’ was weak tea at best,” he told AFP. “It’s like promising your doctor that you will ‘transition away from donuts’ after being diagnosed with diabetes. The lack of an agreement to phase out fossil fuels was devastating.”
Mann called for a substantial reform of the COP rules, for example permitting super-majorities to approve decisions over the objections of holdout petro states like Saudi Arabia, and barring oil executives such as COP28 president Sultan Al Jaber from presiding over future summits.
…
‘Death knell for 1.5C’
“No doubt there will be lots of cheer and back-slapping… but the physics will not care,” said Kevin Anderson, a professor of energy and climate change at the University of Manchester.
…
‘Many will die’
Friederike Otto, a climatologist and leader in the field of assessing the role of climate change on specific extreme weather events, was equally damning. … “With every vague verb, every empty promise in the final text, millions more people will enter the frontline of climate change and many will die.”
…
Read more: https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231214-weak-tea-climate-scientists-push-back-against-cop28-cheer
Mann’s demand for a transition to a supermajority rather than unanimous vote is intriguing. I mean, how does Mann plan to enforce agreements if he has his supermajority, but one or two key players like India or China say no? Send in the US army?
These climate scientists just aren’t living in the real world.
Of course as COP28 demonstrated, you can just wait until the most intransigent delegates are out of the room before calling a vote.
Not only are the climate alarmists living in a world defined by junk science, but by using today’s known climate science, they can’t even (or won’t say) how much “man-made” CO2 warmed the earth last year – or any prior year — because the answer is very embarrassing.
They don’t have this answer. That’s why it’s embarrassing.
They don’t even know this basic fact about CO2. So what do they do? They go off half-cocked and proceed to destroy our economies and societies trying to control CO2 without any evidence that CO2 needs to be controlled.
Somebody should teach these climate alarmists the difference between evidence and fantasy.
where are the millions of deaths from global warming? nowhere…
I’ll settle for one death. Can they point to a single death caused by AGW? No? Well then…
I think 7 were reported a few years back. But that might have been speculation, like everything else.
They’re happening VIRTUALLY everywhere. Just ask the models…and everyone knows Modeled data is actual data
They’re happening VIRTUALLY.
Yep, went to one of those Virtual funerals yesterday.
Lots of climate based reputational deaths, tho. Minimum summer Arctic sea ice extent now measured by skeptics in Wadhams (1 million km^2) is but one example. Last summer was about 4.5 Wadhams. His prediction was 0 by about 2014. Oopsie.
Uh . . . sorry to be so pesky but to mirror Independent’s challenge to I_Love_CO2, above (@3:21), can you point to a single warmist “expert” whose reputation “has died” so they are no longer able to find a forum on which to spout their nonsense?
Actually, Wadhams’s definition of “ice free” was 1 million km²
(could he get any more senile and stupid)
Hence the definition of 1 Wadham = 1 million km²
I keep waiting for that NASA idiot, the one that has put his family through hell, to “off” himself – he’s seriously deranged and unstable – total loss of reality.
Also, I’m sure a climate protesters will get run over or cause a bad accident – delay a critical patient in an ambulance, at some point soon and end in death.
That’ll be some of the few ways “Climate Change™ ” can actually cause a death.
There are two who appear to be completely unstable and in need of watching – Peter Kalmus that you mention above and Gianluca Grimalda, the lunatic who took 50 days to make a trip that could have taken 3 whilst emmitting far more CO2 than flying. Both, coincidentally, are members of ‘scientists rebellion’ – either it attracts the least stable or, once they join, it makes them that way.
Both
Ask Sadiq Khan – he can attribute nonexistent deaths to anything you like then pronounce it as fact with a perfectly straight face; it’s quite a skill he’s got.
And then put a tax on it.
In their nightmares.
But a Swedish NGO reports that each year 4 million people die because they don’t have access to fossil fuels – heating and cooking with parasite infested dung for fuel
There are about 4.6 million deaths from the cold causing heart attacks and strokes every year compared to about 500,000 deaths from heat.
When it is cold our bodies restrict blood flow to conserve heat causing blood pressure to rise and strokes and heart attacks to increase in the cooler months. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00081-4/fulltext
Global warming killed me once.
(but I got better . . . )
h/t M. Python
CO2 ppm in atmosphere is a life saver of flora and fauna.
No CO2, no life
CO2 is near the lowest level during the past 600 million years
That level is a starvation level of fauna
Fauna growth does best with 800 to 1200 ppm, as proven in greenhouses.
Reducing CO2 by 2050, is totally foolish, a suicide pact
There was no visible change in 2020 CO2 level increases when human CO2 was reduced by 6% because of people working from home and lots of restaurants and bars closed.
Human reduction didn’t change the growth in CO2 at all.
Maybe the oceans are absorbing less CO2 as the warming of the oceans has continued.
https://www.co2.earth/monthly-co2
CO2 only increases from Oct through May in the northern hemisphere. The shutdowns, and hence declines, were greatest during this period, being as great as 14-18% in April 2020. Yet, there were no obvious changes that would readily distinguish 2020 from 2019 or 2021.
“That level is a starvation level of
faunafloraFaunaFlora growth does best with 800 to 1200 ppm, as proven in greenhouses.Reducing CO2 by 2050, is totally foolish, a suicide pact”
Sorry to be pedantic
If many will die, won’t that be a good thing? After all, the enviro-alarmists are always reminding us that overpopulation is one of the main causes of the “climate crisis”. No doubt they’ll be the first willing to lay down their lives to save the planet.
Wait 2 years when earth may start cooling, how many may die then.
May not need to wait that long. Temperatures in mainland China are hitting record lows right now.
Thank you for bringing light to extreme cold in Asia. All I see on social media is the weaponization of extremely warm conditions in North America. I’m not at the epicenter of the warm event, but I can tell you its not at all unusual. It’s just milder than typical.
Same in Australia. Sydney had 44C this week. Just a normal summer’s day.
I wouldn’t say it’s a normal summer’s day, but it’s not unusual in the western suburbs.
it’s about 20F this morning in Wokeachusetts- I’d prefer to be about 50F warmer!
strange, but I don’t see any mention of that in today’s Boston Globe!
Don’t give them any ideas!!! They are basically a religious cult, some of them living on low protein vegan meals affecting their brains like other suicide cults – with leaders enjoying all that fossil fuels have to give.
How many more COP will it take before the cabal realizes the only reason nations attend is to virtue signal and the only reason people attend is for the party?
And one reason we follow their news is for the opportunity to use sharp humor.
Small nations are there to grift a little cash, as well.
Probably not the only reason otherwise they probably wouldn’t all have been out of the room when the deal was made!
a lot of those attendees have made a nice career out of it, they’ll keep it going as long as there are politicians gullible enough to fund it
Mann acts like a union organizer / negotiator.
Goes into the negotiating table with a list of preposterously ludicrous demands knowing that the employer’s negotiating team will unceremoniously reject them out of hand, then boasts to the workers outside how hard he fought for their side.
Mann does this to his followers, who are just as credulous as the union members.
You’re assuming he has the intelligence to recognise the difference between a reasonable position and preposterously ludicrous demands – I don’t think he does.
Before COP 28 – everyone dies of something, somewhere, sometime.
After COP 28 – “many will die”
Seems like an improvement. How did they pull that off?
/sarc.
‘Michael Mann … “The agreement to ‘transition away from fossil fuels’ was weak tea at best,” he told AFP.’
I’d like to see the Biden ‘administration’ put this ‘agreement’ in front of the Senate. In fact, if the Republicans had a brain, they would insist on a vote.
There are probably a lot of rich Republicans looking to make trillions from windmills and solar panels themselves.
And Democrats – just look at how Gore made his $200m+
I think I accidentally drew my finger across the screen and down voted you. Sorry. I don’t downvote anyone, not even Mann if he should show up here.
You can change it back, or at least I’m able to. Upvote to reverse the downvote then upvote again if you want to upvote the comment.
Considering Michael Mann’s ludicrously bad MBH98 “hockey stick” study, it reflects just how weak the science is for any of his claims.
No, they won’t.
Friederike Otto
I looked at this person’s characteristics a few weeks ago.
She is as nutty as a fruitcake. Talking parrots make more sense.
She is part of what is descibed as “a rapid reaction force of climate scientists” ready to descend on areas of extreme weather at short notice. Pure fantasist, living in her own little dreamworld where, no doubt, she is a superhero and not some inadequate delusionary crackpot.
Think of all those airmiles she must collect
Many will die before 2050….Senile Joke Biden…Jonnie Kerry….Mikey Mann….Allie Gore….but their evil deeds will live on…………..
“These climate scientists just aren’t living in the real world.” That is for sure.
In the real world, none of their supposed to have happened by now predictions happened.
In the real world, climate models are ‘off’. They produce a tropical troposphere hotspot that does not exist, and an ECS twice that of observational EBM.
In the real world, net zero is impossible.
In the real world, increasing CO2 is causing planetary greening and increased crop yields.
Climate scientists live in the unreal world of academia, where their alarm pays handsomely in tenure, and research grants into further alarm. Recent academic MSM alarm stuff like half of all fresh water fish species threatened by climate extinction. Or mosquito borne tropical diseases will spread north.
To precisely define academia: ‘Those that can do. Those that can’t teach’.
Most of the climate enthusiasts can’t do either of those, hence the need to support them with research grants in institutions after they receive an utterly useless degree.
Hey Rud
Net Zero is possible but 90% of the population wouldn’t like the way it gets achieved.
It requires a 90% reduction in population to create a situation where renewable energy becomes viable and demand levels are dropped sufficiently enough to offset material availability to meet the net zero requirements
And you forgot the most obvious that the blaring media help obscure – what’s the big deal about 1 or 2 degrees of extra warmth on an ice covered planet where most people would experience a temperature range from freezing cold to warm enough?
Michael Mann and others are the contemporary equivalents of Trofim Lysenko, the Soviet agronomist whose Lamarkian ideas were favored by Stalin and became dogma for awhile there. The US government, for whatever reason, has accepted their theories of an invisible CO2 fantasy for inevitable weather fluctuations as being indicative of climate change as an existential threat. In doing so, the rest of academia must agree in order to receive research funding and scientific journal publication. While Lysenko’s ideas were a negative for Soviet science and agriculture they didn’t extend to the replacement of the Soviet energy system and the waste of trillions of rubles on unnecessary changes in the day-to-day life of the already beleaguered Russian citizenry.
In the year 2025
We will all still be alive
This old Earth has changed before
And for fossil fuels please give me some more!
“To precisely define academia: ‘Those that can do. Those that can’t teach’.”
And those that can’t do either go into politics.
Those who can’t teach, teach teachers. Those who can’t even teach teachers go into politics.
I guess Ms. Clinton is proving that her teaching skills are lacking. Not even her leftist students can stand her.
“Those who can’t even teach teachers go into politics.”
Or educational research.
Story Tip:
“The survey found that most religious Americans, including an overwhelming majority of Catholics, do not see the climate as a crisis. In some categories, the number of climate alarmism believers is even decreasing.”
https://www.tfp.org/poll-finds-it-takes-faith-to-believe-in-climate-change/?PKG=TFPE3222
Curious title – the content is the opposite.
Pope Francis is roughly the only Catholic who “believes” in climate change – so don’t judge other Catholics by this outlier – out-liar? Pope Benedict didn’t waste any paper discussing the climate, and there are even more serious moral issues now more than a decade later and P. Francis, elected through the machinations of the “St. Gallen’s Mafia” (down the road, maybe, from WEF?), seems obsessed with “fossil fuels = rich oil companies” in stead of “fossil fuels = God’s gift to humanity, responsible for the better of everyone on a scale that no one could have imagined 200 years ago.”
Climastrology
Scientology is getting desperate….running out of suckers….maybe the same will happen
Climagastrology
Eat the warmth!
Otto: With every vague verb, every empty promise in the final text, millions more people will enter the frontline of climate change and many will die.”
He could have added, but without affordable fossil fuels billions would die”, but that goes without saying.
It wouldn’t have been as doom ‘n’ gloom if she had said that though.
Fredi as she is known to her friends is fond of saying many will die.
“What were concerns over the impact on (sic) climate change are understood realities, it is costing thousands, perhaps millions, of deaths globally every single year”
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news-and-events/oxford-people/fredi-otto
The reality of the COP-tastrophes is that they will achieve nothing meaningful whilst by directed by technically illiterate, innumerate politicians and celebrity catastrophists.
They’ve tried cajolling using the so-called science, that failed , not least because none of the above understood it, so now they’re reverting to straight catastrophisation scare-mongering.
What they’re intending is nothing less than controlling the economic and population growth of all nations, set against the backdrop of the largest ever technological revolution , which can only be achieved using the technology and scientific resources of all the world’s oil majors to find alternatives for millions of fossil fuel and petrochemical products and processes.
In buying into the COP mantra the developed nations are telling the rest of the world that we have got here using fossil fuels, but you can’t do that , you have to use more expensive nuclear , and inherently unreliable renewables technology.
Then the irony is that in choosing nuclear over fossil fuels the COPS are committing to the underground storage of nuclear waste, the inevitable associated leaks and pollution, for future generations to deal with, over emissions.
That’s before we get to the costs and time of developing replacements for petrochemicals and byproducts in a post-oil world.
Not forgetting that when the COPs say goodbye to fossil fuels and emissions they are also saying goodbye to current processes for pharmaceuticals, vacinnes, adhesives, paints, lubricants, plastics, rubbers, fertilisers, pesticides etc, etc.
The problem is calling for a “super-majority”. It would be majority of votes — each “nation” , each representative of a national government, having the same 1 vote each. What this really means is rule by small states.
Only the top 37 countries, by population, have more people than the State of California alone. Only the top 67 have populations more than Greater Los Angeles.
That makes 156 countries smaller than California voting against the larger countries. Thus even a 3/4s super-majority (144 votes) would over-rule the will of the vast majority of the world’s population.
These top 37 countries represent 6.3 Billion of the world’s 8.1 Billion people — which is 75% of world population, So, maybe only those 37 countries should vote at all – they represent a 3/4 scale super-majority of population.
Mann has only ever been in favour of a democratic process when it favoured his alarmism. The coalition of small island states that are vehemently against fossil fuels with tiny populations would be able to block the vast majority of the world from a decision. Which is presumably why there was a vote when they were conveniently occupied on ‘other business.’
They may claim that, but the Maldive Islands are undertaking a huge expansion of their airport. They need to increase air passenger capacity for their only industry: tourism.
The Maldive islands do not have ‘an’ airport, they have 18 and are building more. They have 5 international airports and 13 domestic ones, all on 289 km2 of land which is spread across 90,000 km2 of water. The maldives consist of 99.6% open water and 0.4% land which is why they need the airports – it’s about the only way they can stay connected.
Quite why, with their reliance on air travel and fossil fuels, they should be in favour of eliminating fossil fuels entirely is a mystery, or perhaps they are just in it for the money?
I would love to know, of those who attended the COP28 how many have solar panels on the roof? I bet NONE! The hypocrites.
David Cameron once bolted a tiny wind turbine to the side of his house…
Wind turbine or childs toy windmill?
“With every vague verb, every empty promise in the final text, millions more people will enter the frontline of climate change and many will die.”
Here is the tell: The total screw up of economies, agriculture, industries and rampant inflation and poverty that follows from actions of the most incompetent Western governments that the world has ever known, is the real existential threat that is poised to challenge the record hundreds of millions of Policy-Caused casualties of the 20th Century. The UN, WEF, academia, global big press and cable news and most of world institutions are all partners in this enterprise.
You will recognize the WEF villains from a quote by the Father of this whole disaster – the late Maurice Strong:
So true. Maurice Strong: Canada’s criminal gift to the world. The day he died should be a day of global celebration that this corrupt SOB finally kicked the bucket. The world was instantly a better place the day he left it.
Many will die? Actually all will die, life is a terminal disease.
yes, the first law of life that should be taught to human rights students is –
“life – no one is coming out of this alive”
The phrase “Born to Die”. When I was about 12 I first keyed into the meaning while listening to a Led Zepplin sound – “All that lives was born to die”, or something like that.
“I’ve seen things, you people wouldn’t believe, hmm …attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion …I’ve watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate …all those moments, will be lost in time like tears in rain.
Time …to …die.”
Some might die alright and here’s the AEMO with publicspeak warning about that-
You’re dreaming Minister Bowen!
‘Real, growing risk’ of power generation falling short (msn.com)
PS: Not happy primitives!
‘What a farce’: NSW residents told to ration electricity (msn.com)
Mann
>> The lack of an agreement to phase out fossil fuels was devastating.
Otto
>> With every vague verb, every empty promise in the final text, millions more people will enter the frontline of climate change and many will die.
No, Mann and Otto, the opposite is true! Cheap and reliable energy will save countless lives!
Not only in Africa, but also in modern and efficient Western countries! Here every dollar wasted on dreamed up lithium or hydrogen economies or inefficient ways to produce electricity is a dollar missing in innovation and research. Last not least the environmentalists complain about a dramatic cut in their funding to safe the planet in favor of some fantastic fear mongering about a potential impact of anthropogenic CO2.
This whole idea is based on shady science, with Mann and Otto we have two examples.
Mann forgets since decades to factor in how the proxy selection affects the calculated past temperatures. There is obviously something missing on a very basic level when two (or many more) studies find different global temperatures for the same time period.
Otto is surfing on the idea that models can calculate and attribute real extreme weather events, in fact most of her research is based on that. Well, she has to explain Alimonti´s findings (rather than trying to suppress the publication in a rather clear show of unethical and anti-scientific behavior.. with Mann “bravely” marching along with her):
There are patterns in extreme weather occurrences in the past, but it does not seem to matter is said extreme weather is potentially related to anthropogenic CO2 like droughts and floods or not like vulcanism and earth quakes. Alimonti shows that these patterns might be an artifact from better extreme weather accounting which means that effect is potentially not real at all and Otto´s research is completely invalid.
It looks to me both of these characters should have better things to do than tooting their opinion in public, t heir real problem is that they are nobodies put in positions of power facing smart people, in the long run they can only loose, the facts are clear and out there, for now they seem to get away with their nonsense publications, but eventually science should catch up with them both.
More people will die falling off roofs installing solar panels.
“It’s like promising your doctor that you will ‘transition away from donuts’ after being diagnosed with diabetes.”
Nope. It’s like promising the nutter on the street screaming “The End Is Nigh! Repent and Be Saved!” that Yes, you’ll do as he says as long as he leaves you alone to go on with your day.
[Otto’s]
–wikipedia
Per her book, weather is “angry” because of human-emitted carbon-dioxide, but here attributes inevitable human deaths to vague verbs and empty promises. If this (and poorly mixed metaphors) are exemplars of “attribution science,” we can easily tell the value of the field.
“A highly recognized expert…”
Whenever that phrase appears, the question is, by whom?
She lives and ‘works’ in Oxford, UK. Need I say more?
Wikipedia. And just you go try to edit that opinion.
Story Tip
“The usual wailing and wild statements we’ve come to expect in the wake of the annual COP failure.”
The statements made in the posting aren’t the worst of it from people who call themselves scientists…..
“Scientists” making fools of themselves at the AGU 2023 conference going on right now in San Francisco….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x42TKnSmorQ
One of the stupidest skits from climate alarmists I have yet seen.
…how does Mann plan to enforce agreements if he has his supermajority, but one or two key players like India or China say no? Send in the US army?
________________________________________________________________
That was pretty much my comment on an internet discussion board nearly 30 years ago when the global warming non-sense began to gather steam.
Mann looks like a guy who eats a lot of donuts.
As for a super majority- what if such a majority does not represent a majority of the population of the planet- since it could occur if many small nations join.
And, he’d like to not allow an oil executive to be a COP president. How about someone from the wind/sun industrial complex? How about an academic known to be a member of the climate cult? Where do you draw the line?
“With every vague verb, every empty promise in the final text, millions more people will enter the frontline of climate change and many will die.”
It was good of Friederlike Otto to provide a perfect example of “vague verbs” and “empty promises” in the very sentence used to call for condemnation of same. Clever.
Mann called for a substantial reform of the COP rules, for example permitting super-majorities to approve decisions over the objections of holdout petro states like Saudi Arabia, and barring oil executives such as COP28 president Sultan Al Jaber from presiding over future summits.
That’s pretty weak stuff. What he really needs to do is to call for the expulsion of all countries which see the need for fossil fuels if they want to take most of their people out of poverty.
Exclude all countries who put their people first, exclude all countries who are watering down the message, exclude all countries who have not proven themselves to be 100% for net zero by inflicting pain on their citizens.
There will be an empty table with Mann, Figueres and Schwab staring at each other.
From the article: “Friederike Otto, a climatologist and leader in the field of assessing the role of climate change on specific extreme weather events”
That made me laugh.
He’s a leader of a pseudoscience called weather attribution. Friederike apparently sees CO2 in every weather event, although he couldn’t prove a connection with CO2 and weather if his life depended on doing so.
All Otto is doing is making unsubstantiated assertions about CO2 and the Earth’s weather events. He has not one bit of evidence to back up any of his claims. Not one bit. He’s just pretending to be a scientist.
Agree wholeheartedly but you got the sex wrong. Fredi is a she.
Careful – misgendering is thoughtcrime.
Not where I’m from, I’m happy to say.
Yes, I noticed that.
I hope she is not offended by me calling her a he.
But, regardless of gender, there is no evidence connecting CO2 to any weather event. There just isn’t. So her claiming she sees a connection is delusional.
We will all die. All of us. Everyone. Just very, very few from climatic causes.
Arguably every person that has died falling through thin ice has died from climate causes. Freezing because you can’t afford heating is another – just not the way Fredi fantasises about it.
Not “climatic” causes; “weather” causes.
“With every vague verb, every empty promise in the final text, millions more people will enter the frontline of climate change and many will die.”
Above is an entirely meaningless threat. By 2021, no matter how many COP meetings and how many well intentioned words are scribed in documents, no how many good intentions there are to defy physics and economics, over 8 billion will die. Most of them can pass peacefully away after long healthy and productive lives assuming we don’t scuttle the entire human enterprise with our idiocy and superstitious fear of normal weather.
The US and Europe don’t swing enough votes to make this thing work like Mann and Kerry want it to. The only way they could do it is by lots of cash on the table, but they are too broke to do that.
The warmunists better start working on adaptation because their go to mitigation strategy is DoA.