Ball: Paris Climate Conference: A Sideshow To More Frightening Use Of False IPCC Climate Science

Reprinted from WUWT

Paris Climate Conference: A Sideshow To More Frightening Use Of False IPCC Climate Science

by Dr. Tim Ball,  January 3, 2016.  from  WUWT

President Obama used the Paris Climate Conference to advance his legacy: an agreement was mandatory no matter the truth or the cost. As a result, the final agreement was meaningless because to get everybody to sign it was made unenforceable. All signatories were willing to agree because they are all politicians playing their own game; not what is right or best for the people. This objective was acceptable to the main drivers outside of the actual political arena. They were using climate change to impose their socialist goal of punishing and weakening capitalism and redistributing their wealth, which they claim was obtained at the expense of the developing nations. Avowed communist and anti-capitalist Naomi Klein attending Paris as a member of Pope Francis delegation saw the political opportunities in climate change.

She herself admits that, as she began to take the problem of climate change more seriously and to think about it more deeply, it did not cause her to change her mind about anything. On the contrary, it reinforced everything that she had always believed. “I was propelled into a deeper engagement with it partly because I realized it could be a catalyst for forms of social and economic justice in which I already believed.”

Ironically, those countries that held out for an unenforceable agreement, like Russia, India, and China, tried socialism and are now embracing aspects of capitalism. The reason they don’t want enforceable limits on fossil fuels is because they want to develop their economies and they know first-hand it doesn’t work with socialism. The result is the paradox that was the Paris Climate Conference. While a small group of people worked to undermine development and capitalism through a false global warming charge, half the world’s population represented by these nations, strives for development through capitalism. Richard Lindzen retired Professor of Atmospheric Physics at MIT summarized the situation best.

“Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early twenty-first century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.”

The conflict in Paris was a separate conflict between those who want to “rollback” the industrial age for those currently developed by capitalism and industrialization and those who want the same advances and benefits. It has little or nothing to do with the political objectives of those, like Klein, who wants total control of people’s lives. Paris only served to promote Obama’s personal objective. Meanwhile, the use of environment and climate for Klein’s socialist objectives continues quietly, surreptitiously and insidiously. It is built around the dictum “Think globally, act locally” attributed to Rene Dubos, an advisor to the Maurice Strong chaired 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment.

Maurice Strong, through the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), transferred the objectives of the Club of Rome into policy. He set up a system that effectively bypassed politicians and legislators. Elaine Dewar, author of Cloak of Green concluded:

Strong was using the U.N. as a platform to sell a global environment crisis and the Global Governance Agenda.

For example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was created by and through the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The bureaucrats of the WMO are government employees from 191 national weather offices of the UN organization. Those bureaucrats inform and direct and thereby control the politicians.

Strong is most responsible for setting up the bureaucratic structure necessary to control the political and science agendas. Neil Hrab wrote in 2001 that Strong achieved this by:

Mainly using his prodigious skills as a networker. Over a lifetime of mixing private sector career success with stints in government and international groups…

This began in earnest with the 1977 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment Stockholm Conference. As Hrab notes:

The three specific goals set out by the Secretary General of the Conference, Maurice F. Strong, at its first plenary session—a Declaration on the human environment, an Action Plan, and an organizational structure supported by a World Environment Fund—were all adopted by the Conference.

What was the Action Plan? It is the goal Strong considered most important and was set out in the Declaration of United Nations Conference on the Human Environment. A key comment in this Declaration explains why Paris is of limited consequence for the larger goal.

Local and national governments will bear the greatest burden for large-scale environmental policy and action within their jurisdictions. International cooperation is also needed in order to raise resources to support the developing countries in carrying out their responsibilities in this field.

This objective was set out in Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, prepared by The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) with a Foreword by Strong. One person who stumbled across this document and realized the implications wrote,

Community leaders around the world are now called to implement a new “Communitarian” system of governance, which overrides our (US) constitutional rights and freedoms.

“Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable….”

The idea and process appear in Chapter 28 of Agenda 21.

“Each local authority should enter into a dialogue with its citizens, local organizations, and private enterprises and adopt ‘a local Agenda 21.’ Through consultation and consensus-building, local authorities would learn from citizens and from local, civic, community, business and industrial organizations and acquire the information needed for formulating the best strategies.” (Agenda 21, Chapter 28, sec 1,3.)

While everybody is focused on Paris, a steady ubiquitous plan of action is taking control of all communities. It is the Climate Action Plan that stems from Agenda 21 using IPCC climate science and predictions as justification. It is central to the diatribe that appears on the White House web page.

In 2007, the British Columbia government of Gordon Campbell was persuaded to create a Climate Action Committee to implement a Climate Action Plan. The committee appeared diversified, but the presence of Andrew Weaver lead author in four IPCC Reports (1995, 2001, 2007, and 2013) guaranteed his dominance. David Keith was at the University of Calgary where he created a Carbon Engineering a company producing CO2 sequestration technology, in my opinion, it is a conflict of interest. Keith is now at Harvard University. The list of Ex-Officio members comprises other IPCC members and all academics at the University of Victoria, including three computer modelers. The non-academic committee members were completely overwhelmed.

The Committee produced the Climate Action Plan (CAP) (It is likely this link won’t open. However, you can access it through this page, lower right hand corner) that included a carbon tax and the installation of Smart Meters. (At the Heartland Conference in Las Vegas, a person identified himself after my presentation as the inventor of the Smart Meter and said they are not being used as I intended.) Smart meters are promoted by BC Hydro the utility that controls all power in the Province. Most of the opposition to the meters involves health effects from the RF transmissions. The larger problem is their potential use for identifying what the authorities determine as excessive users. On page 10 of the document, Weaver confirms the objective of ignoring what Federal levels of government do just as Strong planned.

“What [the B.C. government has] done here is they recognize this is the right thing to do, it’s the only thing to do to address this problem and we’re not going to wait for the feds or someone to do it. We’re going to show leadership in North America and you watch, it’s going to start to have a ripple down effect and others are going to start to join up as the years go by.”

This appears like more conflict of interest, as he is the one who used IPCC computer models to create the proof that human CO2 was the problem. This despite, the complete failure of any projection they ever made. Weaver is now Green Party leader in BC and a member of the Provincial Legislation. The PR Company for BCHydro is Hoggan and Associates. James Hoggan is also Chairman of the David Suzuki Foundation and proud creator of DeSmogblog as he attests in his book Climate Cover-Up.

I became aware of the intrusive nature of the CAP when invited to make a presentation on Mayne Island in the Straits of Georgia (Figure 1).

clip_image002

Figure 1 (Source: BC Ferries)

A group of concerned citizens attended a presentation by Provincial government bureaucrats promoting the CAP. It began with showing Al Gore’s movie An Inconvenient Truth followed by a discussion of proposed plans, including banning all vehicular traffic. I was invited to make a public PowerPoint question and answer presentation. The local eco-bully immediately attacked, I use that term deliberately, and left early when I was able to answer all his questions and counteract his claims. Now there are a group of citizens who constantly monitor what is going on including asking occasional questions of clarification. The problem is I cannot visit every community or counteract the power, accessibility and persistence of the bureaucracy. As Laurence Peter, creator of the Peter Principle explained,

Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time the quo has lost its status.

The extent of the intrusiveness of CAP continues despite the meaningless nature of Paris. Figure 2 shows the number of US States already committed to CAP.

clip_image004

Figure 2

I urge people to find out what is happening in their State or local government. They are under the pressure to save the planet sweetened with a variety of financial incentives that are hard to resist, but as the people of Mayne Island found, they never heard the “other side’ of the story. The problem is there is the combined waste of Federal money and the negative impact on societies and economies all to deal with a false problem created by the UN.

Paris achieved its goal in allowing Obama to achieve his personal objectives. All participants agreed to an agreement because they are all there with personal objectives. It is like the comment about “honor among thieves”. The real drivers of the agenda didn’t care because they know the agenda of total control, as devised by Maurice Strong through Agenda 21, is in full flight as Local Agenda 21, but almost completely under the radar. The actions are cloaked in the claim that the planet will be free, released from the burdens imposed by capitalism and those who seek individual liberty. As Vaclav Klaus, former President of the Czech Republic said as his opening remark as Keynote Speaker at the first Heartland Climate Conference in New York, “We just went through 70 years of communism, why the hell would you want to go back to that?” He also wrote in his book “Blue Planet in Green Shackles,”

It should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism (or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans, about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual as the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a noble idea.”

Witness the Carbon Footprint of This Fully Armed and Operational Climate Summit

Witness the Carbon Footprint of This Fully Armed and Operational Climate Summit

by John Hayward, November 30, 2015. Breitbart.

Skepticism about climate change dogma is reaching a generational peak.
One of the reasons is that climate change alarmists stubbornly refuse to live as if they believe a single word of what they’re saying. The size of their carbon footprints is staggering. Just look at all the fossil fuels they burn to attend entirely unnecessary “climate conferences.”

Yes, these conferences are unnecessary.

It’s 2015. We have incredibly advanced telecommuting systems. All of the political and scientific work behind a climate conference is performed using such global computer networking, long before the conference is held. Climate confabs are an excuse for politicians to soak their taxpayers for luxury junkets to exotic vacation destinations, where they stay in five-star hotels and dine on the finest gourmet foods.

(Lunch at the Paris climate conference on Monday, according to Politico: special turnip soup, scallops in a climate-symbolic “modern” sauce, stuffed celery confit with veined spinach cream, and then a trilogy of freshwater trout roe caviar, vegetable jelly, and coltsfoot, plus Reblochon au jus scented with myyrh, caraway wood, and a salad of wild undergrowth and tree beans.  And yes, of course there will be dessert – citrus compote and light cream with praline.)

Climate conferences are pricey photo ops with no valid purpose beyond influencing media coverage, a fact the grandees at the Paris event have emphasized with their insulting blather about how holding the conference will somehow “rebuke” the Islamic State.

The hilariously obvious truth that no one attending the event actually believes the apocalyptic predictions they dump on their constituents makes these conferences into the equivalent of a “safari” at Disney World – a chance to laugh, hang out with friends, and enjoy a little shiver of play-acting fear as animatronic wild animals lunge at your robot-piloted jungle cruise boat.

Of course, the international elites attending these conferences don’t want anyone measuring their Godzilla-sized carbon footprints. That would be “cynical,” to use President Obama’s new favorite word for informed skeptics. When you hear a big-spending politician rail against “cynicism,” it’s a good idea to grab your wallet, put on your green eyeshade, and start adding up their expenses. For socialists, cost-benefit analysis is the most wretched form of cynicism.

So how much carbon are these climate junketeers burning? The jet set loves to lecture the rest of us about how air travel is the worst source of carbon pollution, but apparently their airborne emissions don’t count, sort of like how everything we eat at Thanksgiving dinner is calorie-free because it’s a magical holiday.

A 2013 analysis at the New York Times described air travel as “the most serious environmental sin” committed by the Little People. “One round-trip flight from New York to Europe or to San Francisco creates a warming effect equivalent to 2 or 3 tons of carbon dioxide per person,” the NYT estimated. “The average American generates about 19 tons of carbon dioxide a year; the average European, 10.”

President Obama swanned off to Paris on the most fabulous private jet in the world, Air Force One, which burns about 5 gallons of jet fuel for every mile it covers. Aviation fuel supposedly releases about 21 pounds of carbon into the atmosphere per gallon, which means President Obama’s 7,656-mile round-trip to Paris will burn 38,280 gallons of fuel, and fart a whopping 803,880 pounds of carbon into the biosphere.

And he’s just one of 150 world leaders attending the conference, many of them bringing entourages that will require more than one plane. Many big-money private interests will attend as well – the climate-industrial complex is one of the richest industries on Earth, even though it doesn’t actually produce anything. The World Economic Forum in Davos earlier this year seems like a roughly comparable event, and it drew 1,700 private aircraft.

They don’t tool around in Chevy Volts when they hit the ground, either. President Obama’s absurdly bloated motorcade, larger than anything fielded by actual crowned royals from nations that still have monarchies, involves dozens of gas-guzzling limousines and SUVs. Some observers report seeing Obama roll with no less than 45 large vehicles in his motorcade. His obnoxious royal presence causes massive traffic jams everywhere he goes, making innocent motorists accessories in his carbon crimes.

The White House severely dislikes answering questions about the President’s carbon footprint, especially his motorcade, so it’s hard to get a definitive answer about how much fuel his ground transportation consumes. When White House reporters raised the subject at the beginning of Obama’s presidency, the response from U.S. climate negotiators included some hysterically funny muttering about “electric vehicle motorcades.” Needless to say, that hasn’t happened, and it never will.

Throw in all of the other world leaders rolling through Paris in their considerably smaller, but still impressive, limousine-and-SUV caravans, and we’re talking about a lot of carbon pumped out for a week of glorified press conferences.

Then there’s the carbon footprint of the massive demonstrations rocking France at the moment, inspired partly by the government imposing restrictions on public protests after the recent terrorist massacre. One clash between police and rioters on Sunday destroyed a memorial to the victims of the Islamic State’s attack on Paris.

Doubtless everyone dining at the climate confab would say, around mouthfuls of scallops and Reblochon au jus scented with myyrh, that holding their five-star shindig in the face of protests and threats is a major point of the exercise this year. That doesn’t change the fact that a vast amount of motor fuel will be burned, and electric power consumed, to handle the entirely predictable strife surrounding a showboating event.

It’s not easy to calculate the total carbon footprint of such an event, especially since so many of the attendees are extremely reluctant to discuss their personal impact on Mother Earth, but Wired took a stab at it, and came up with an estimate of fifty thousand total attendees at the Paris talks, traveling an average of 9,000 miles round-trip apiece, burning 27 million gallons of jet fuel along the way. Adding in sundry ground emissions, the total carbon footprint works out to 300,000 tons of CO2, or over 23,000 times the carbon emissions of an average American for an entire year.

But none of that is supposed to matter, because the Angry Sky Gods allow their high priests and faithful worshipers a special dispensation to spew as much pollution as they want, especially during religious services.

Quote Of The Year.

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

[Can’t see anyone coming up with anything better…!]

Indeed.


This is a Clash of Civilizations. We are in WWIII and only one side is taking it seriously.

John the Libertarian on November 14, 2015 at 11:43 AM


Related: The Pope concurs…

Steyn: The Barbarians Are Inside, And There Are No Gates [Updated]

[Editorial note: The topic of fluffy, empty condolences was big on Twitter yesterday. We take exception to the worldwide propensity to reflect “solidarity” with France with what can only be seen as obscene spectacles such as building lights in the French Tricolor colours, while making absolutely no commitment to actually do anything about radical Islam and Islamists. Western nations and their leaders need to wake-the-hell up. Islam is not compatible with western values and thought, nor is it tolerant of the values that millions have fought and died for.]

[Update: Mark has expanded his comments on the Paris issue in today’s editorial from him. Read also Cool civilizational death wish goes viral.

The Barbarians Are Inside, And There Are No Gates

by Mark Steyn, November 13, 2015

Additional resources:
Additional images from the New York Times
Extensive coverage from the Daily Mail, London

As I write, Paris is under curfew for the first time since the German occupation, and the death toll from the multiple attacks stands at 158, the vast majority of them slaughtered during a concert at the Bataclan theatre, a delightful bit of 19th century Chinoiserie on the boulevard Voltaire. The last time I was there, if memory serves, was to see Julie Pietri. I’m so bloody sick of these savages shooting and bombing and killing and blowing up everything I like – whether it’s the small Quebec town where my little girl’s favorite fondue restaurant is or my favorite hotel in Amman or the brave freespeecher who hosted me in Copenhagen …or a music hall where I liked to go to hear a little jazz and pop and get away from the cares of the world for a couple of hours. But look at the photographs from Paris: there’s nowhere to get away from it; the barbarians who yell “Allahu Akbar!” are there waiting for you …when you go to a soccer match, you go to a concert, you go for a drink on a Friday night. They’re there on the train… at the magazine office… in the Kosher supermarket… at the museum in Brussels… outside the barracks in Woolwich…

Twenty-four hours ago, I said on the radio apropos the latest campus “safe space” nonsense:

This is what we’re going to be talking about when the mullahs nuke us.

Almost. When the Allahu Akbar boys opened fire, Paris was talking about the climate-change conference due to start later this month, when the world’s leaders will fly in to “solve” a “problem” that doesn’t exist rather than to address the one that does. But don’t worry: we already have a hashtag (#PrayForParis) and doubtless there’ll be another candlelight vigil of weepy tilty-headed wankers. Because as long as we all advertise how sad and sorrowful we are, who needs to do anything?

With his usual killer comedy timing, the “leader of the free world” told George Stephanopoulos on “Good Morning, America” this very morning that he’d “contained” ISIS and that they’re not “gaining strength”. A few hours later, a cell whose members claim to have been recruited by ISIS slaughtered over 150 people in the heart of Paris and succeeded in getting two suicide bombers and a third bomb to within a few yards of the French president.

Visiting the Bataclan, M Hollande declared that “nous allons mener le combat, il sera impitoyable“: We are going to wage a war that will be pitiless.

Does he mean it? Or is he just killing time until Obama and Cameron and Merkel and Justin Trudeau and Malcolm Turnbull fly in and they can all get back to talking about sea levels in the Maldives in the 22nd century? By which time France and Germany and Belgium and Austria and the Netherlands will have been long washed away.

Among his other coy evasions, President Obama described tonight’s events as “an attack not just on Paris, it’s an attack not just on the people of France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share”.

But that’s not true, is it? He’s right that it’s an attack not just on Paris or France. What it is is an attack on the west, on the civilization that built the modern world – an attack on one portion of “humanity” by those who claim to speak for another portion of “humanity”. And these are not “universal values” but values that spring from a relatively narrow segment of humanity. They were kinda sorta “universal” when the great powers were willing to enforce them around the world and the colonial subjects of ramshackle backwaters such as Aden, Sudan and the North-West Frontier Province were at least obliged to pay lip service to them. But the European empires retreated from the world, and those “universal values” are utterly alien to large parts of the map today.

And then Europe decided to invite millions of Muslims to settle in their countries. Most of those people don’t want to participate actively in bringing about the death of diners and concertgoers and soccer fans, but at a certain level most of them either wish or are indifferent to the death of the societies in which they live – modern, pluralist, western societies and those “universal values” of which Barack Obama bleats. So, if you are either an active ISIS recruit or just a guy who’s been fired up by social media, you have a very large comfort zone in which to swim, and which the authorities find almost impossible to penetrate.

And all Chancellor Merkel and the EU want to do is make that large comfort zone even larger by letting millions more “Syrian” “refugees” walk into the Continent and settle wherever they want. As I wrote after the Copenhagen attacks in February:

I would like to ask Mr Cameron and Miss Thorning-Schmidt what’s their happy ending here? What’s their roadmap for fewer “acts of violence” in the years ahead? Or are they riding on a wing and a prayer that they can manage the situation and hold it down to what cynical British civil servants used to call during the Irish “Troubles” “an acceptable level of violence”? In Pakistan and Nigeria, the citizenry are expected to live with the reality that every so often Boko Haram will kick open the door of the schoolhouse and kidnap your daughters for sex-slavery or the Taliban will gun down your kids and behead their teacher in front of the class. And it’s all entirely “random”, as President Obama would say, so you just have to put up with it once in a while, and it’s tough if it’s your kid, but that’s just the way it is. If we’re being honest here, isn’t that all Mr Cameron and Miss Thorning-Schmidt are offering their citizens? Spasms of violence as a routine feature of life, but don’t worry, we’ll do our best to contain it – and you can help mitigate it by not going to “controversial” art events, or synagogues, or gay bars, or…

…or soccer matches, or concerts, or restaurants…

To repeat what I said a few days ago, I’m Islamed out. I’m tired of Islam 24/7, at Colorado colleges, Marseilles synagogues, Sydney coffee shops, day after day after day. The west cannot win this thing with a schizophrenic strategy of targeting things and people but not targeting the ideology, of intervening ineffectually overseas and not intervening at all when it comes to the remorseless Islamization and self-segregation of large segments of their own countries.

So I say again: What’s the happy ending here? Because if M Hollande isn’t prepared to end mass Muslim immigration to France and Europe, then his “pitiless war” isn’t serious. And, if they’re still willing to tolerate Mutti Merkel’s mad plan to reverse Germany’s demographic death spiral through fast-track Islamization, then Europeans aren’t serious. In the end, the decadence of Merkel, Hollande, Cameron and the rest of the fin de civilisation western leadership will cost you your world and everything you love.

So screw the candlelight vigil.

Mark has written extensively about this topic in his books: Lights Out, America Alone and After America.

Gallery

Things I hate about the Internet: Jacob Thomas Brewer, 1981 – 2016 Update: Funeral Details Update2: A memorial note from MKH

This gallery contains 1 photos.

One of the things that I hate about the internet, is that not only do I get to share the successes and riches of the lives of the people I meet online, I must also, a priori, share their deep … Continue reading

Gallery

“Believe Half of What You See, None of What You Read”

Variations on “believe half of what you read, see or hear, none of what you read, hear or see”, have been attributed to a whole gamut of historical figures from Benjamin Franklin to Edgar Allan Poe, but the message in … Continue reading