Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Carnival Of The Liberated | Main | Stop being nasty »

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Can 10,000 Delegates Possibly Be Wrong?

In "The Winds of Crisis" [Nat'l Post, Nov. 29, FP Comment, p64 ($), h/t to Jack], Terence Corcoran writes about the meeting taking place in Montreal about global warming:

On the rock-solid assumption that 10,000 people from 180 countries cannot possibly reach a rational conclusion on any subject, it follows that the climate meeting launched yesterday in Montreal is destined to do something irrational. The only question is: How much crazier can global climate policy get?

The last major United Nations climate control operation was the Kyoto Protocol, a carbon emissions plan so far off road that most nations, including host Canada, have been forced to ignore it as unworkable and unattainable.

Execution of Kyoto would plunge the world into an energy crisis of massive growth-killing power. Kyoto expires in 2012. If they couldn’t generate a global energy crisis with Kyoto, they intend to try again with new, tougher targets for a post-Kyoto era.

Collective delusion knows no bounds. No politician could sell carbon-reduction plans at home without getting laughed out of office. That’s why we have Montreal, where the absurdity can be glossed over by having 10,000 people — politicians, bureaucrats, NGOs, industry types — locked up for two weeks and forced to produce a declaration to end the world economy as we know it. If everybody’s doing it, then it must be OK.

I have a friend who has written some items about global warming that have won world acclaim. He is equally skeptical, saying,

A few years back ... , my coauthor and I discussed that fact that Canada would not remotely have the capability of achieving the Kyoto targets. We debated whether the Liberals would be able to ratify it assuming the truth would eventually haunt them politically. I was of the view that they would ratify, then not live up to their commitment and just say they did, while paying no political price. I did not have any insight except shameful cynicism to go on.

They did ratify, they committed to reduce CO2 production rates to 1990 rates but rates are now 24% *larger * instead of declining. This phenomenon seems to be widespread among those countries who signed Kyoto. (Ironically, the US has been vilified for not signing onto Kyoto but has only a 16% rate increase in the same period.)

Now signing onto Kyoto will be put forward in the election as a great achievement for the Liberals. So I suppose I was right, not that it does me or anyone any good.

Also, according to my forecast about "coincidences" Nature's most recent issue just happens to have a study claiming that global warming is already responsible for 150000 deaths... Nature is becoming like the National Enquirer. They really cannot help themselves.

Posted by EclectEcon on November 30, 2005 in Current Affairs | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d834986f6b69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Can 10,000 Delegates Possibly Be Wrong?:

Comments

I don't know what's going on in the rest of the world, but it's getting a bit cooler here in Nanaaimo BC. There is a bit of snow on the ground which is unusual for this early in the winter.

I can't figure out why those guys meeting in Montreal are complaining about global warming. I'll bet it's even colder there.

Have a laugh at
http://dukemcgoo.blogspot.com

Posted by: Duke | 2005-11-30 8:42:02 PM


Kyoto -Moe Strong-Power Corp-Desmarais-Martin-Chrétien- want to be the Lilliputians that tie down the giant US-Gulliver. One would think this would all have become obvious by now. I still believe the facts and truth win in the end, but it sure takes a lot longer then it should.

Posted by: nomdenet | 2005-11-30 8:43:59 PM


And don't forget, there's bird flew too. I'm so confused, I thought birds flew. Except flightless birds, of course.

The media industry knows that you sell advertising by scaring people. That's why everything they say has to be taken with a cubit of salt.

Is the climate changing? Well, given that the exact spot where I'm sitting right now was under 2,000 meters of ice in the relatively recent past, I'd have to guess yes.

Is anthropogenic global warming a problem? The way I read the numbers, that argument is off by at least an order of magnitude. I'm not adamant about this, if I'm wrong I'd like to be shown so. The environment isn't something I want to be grossly wrong about.

Earlier today, the following came across the wire:

“We keep crying wolf and we keep overstating the doomsday scenario,” said Ong Keng Yong, the Secretary General of the Association of South East Asian Nations (Asean). “It will not serve the cause of protecting the environment.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4486848.stm

Posted by: Vitruvius | 2005-11-30 8:46:20 PM


Global warming is the greatest threat to the planet since the great Global Cooling scare of 1975!

If Harper is elected, his second act should be to scrap Kyoto entirely. The first should be to shut down the CBC permanently.

Posted by: Scott | 2005-11-30 8:51:17 PM


I wonder when the delegation from the "People's" "Democratic" "Republic" of Korea will take the mic to slander the United States of America's Kyoto commitment(and war crimes(and the imminent nuclear attack)).

Followed by sustained applause.

Canada's CO2 emmitions are 24% higher than 1990 levels.
America is 12% higher than 1990 levels.

Hypocricy loves company.

Posted by: Knight of Good Mr. Iron Man | 2005-11-30 9:45:16 PM


Harper should come out and clearly state we are getting out of Kyoto. For any rational person, the reasons are obvious. Follow it up with real plans on reducing real pollution.

It would also allow the NDP to highlight the Lieberal hypocrisy on implementing Kyoto with no plan and no action, driving the environuts to the NDP.

I have never seen any debate on the voodoo science of the greenhouse effect. All you ever get is "Well, scientists say..." Oh yeah? Which scientists? What were their analytical methods? What planet did they observe an increase in "greenhouse" gasses resulting in an increase in planetary temperature? Doesn't Mars have a lot of CO2? seems pretty cold there.

I really hope a list of "scientists" that support this unprovable theory is kept so their careers and reputations are forever blackmarked with this fearmongering.

It's like telling a bunch of savages "the sky will turn black if you don't gimme all your gold" when you know there's a solar eclipse coming.

Posted by: johnmac | 2005-11-30 11:03:03 PM


You may wish to check out http://www.sepp.org/pressrel/petition.html
where it is stated that:

FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA, APRIL 21, 1998---More than 15,000 scientists, [8/4/98: now about 17,000] two-thirds with advanced academic degrees, have now signed a Petition against the climate accord concluded in Kyoto (Japan) in December 1997. The Petition (see text below) urges the US government to reject the Accord, which would force drastic cuts in energy use on the United States. This is in line with the Senate Resolution, approved by a 95-to-0 vote last July, which turns down any international agreement that damages the economy of the United States while exempting most of the world's nations, including such major emerging economic powers as China, India, and Brazil.

In signing the Petition within a period of less than six weeks, the 15,000 basic and applied scientists -- an unprecedented number for this kind of document -- also expressed their profound skepticism about the science underlying the Kyoto Accord. The atmospheric data simply do not support the elaborate computer-driven climate models that are being cited by the United Nations and other promoters of the Accord as "proof" of a major future warming. The covering letter enclosed with the Petition, signed by Dr. Frederick Seitz, president emeritus of Rockefeller University and a past president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, states it well:

"The treaty is, in our opinion, based upon flawed ideas. Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons is harmful. To the contrary, there is good evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is environmentally helpful."

Posted by: Vitruvius | 2005-11-30 11:36:44 PM


Yeah, but where's the rebuttal to these thousands of scientists? Which scientists are the environuts quoting?

Most of the people I talk to think I'm crazy for suggesting the greenhouse effect isn't an established law of the universe like gravity. There is no public debate on this subject. Reporters and editorialists routinely quote it as established fact.

I think it would make a great election topic in that so many people would realize how casually they've been lied to and the disastrous consequences Kyoto would bring. CPC is not getting environuts to vote for them one way or the other.

Posted by: johnmac | 2005-12-01 12:27:21 AM


I posted this before in another comments section, but it bears repeating:

Icky Gas Drilling rigs soon to appear on Maurice Strong's Baca Ranch.

http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2005/04/some-people-call-me-maurice.html
http://ogj.pennnet.com/articles/article_display.cfm?Section=ONART&C=ExplD&ARTICLE_ID=242432&p=7
http://www.lexamexplorations.com/s_12.asp#

How will they hide those big things from the moonbats?

Posted by: JM | 2005-12-01 3:12:38 AM


the CBC's coverage of this issue is hilarious. In their "in-depth" coverage of Kyoto, two sentences of lip service is given to those who disagree with the "science" behind it. they are described as only a minority, but a very "vocal" minority. Translation: you will hear people disagree with this, but they're only a small minority who won't shut up - don't listen to them.

Even funnier is Mr. One-tonne challenge himself, the paid government Kyoto propogandist, Rick Mercer, went to Fort. Mac and drove a huge oil sands truck. His hypocrisy will come full circle if he goes to a Kyoto-exempt Ontario auto factory next!

Posted by: Charlotte | 2005-12-01 6:21:05 AM


Does anyone remember seeing that letter a few weeks ago from Cdn. busines leaders to Paulie-boy saying that global warming was such a dire threat that a plan had to be in place by 2050?

45 years to deal with the most pressing problem the world has ever seen? Sheesh.

Licia Corbella, in yesterday's Sun had a column about this conference. She interviewed Dr. Tim Patterson, a professor in the Department of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology) at Carleton University in Ottawa. Neither are impressed.

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Corbella_Licia/2005/11/30/1329759.html

Posted by: Kathryn | 2005-12-01 8:34:48 AM


KYOTO = BACKDOOR NEP

NOTHING MORE NOTHING LESS

Posted by: AsISeeIt | 2005-12-01 10:19:54 AM


NEWS FLASH FROM MBC! (Martian Broadcasting Company)
BUSH IS CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING ON MARS!
HALLIBURTON IMPLICATED!

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mars_ice-age_031208.html

Really, there is evidence that Mars is coming out of an ice age. I wonder if whatever is causeing that might also warm up the Earth? Perhaps that giant ball of fusing hydrogen is a factor.
I made up the part about Bush and Halliburton, I'm hoping to work for the CBC and eventually become the GG.

Posted by: Virgil | 2005-12-01 11:11:29 AM


Kyoto targets will be met by E.U. (they voted to go as 1 so the East German #'s and former Commie countries cleanup results in meeting their #'s) - Russia has surplus #'s. Australia which bargained for an 8% increase realized they couldn't make and backed out. So did N.Z. The U.S. senate (which ratifies treaties) voted overwhelmingly not to ratify Clinton's signature. This leaves Canada and Japan as the only signators in huge default. The deadline to dump the treaty for Canada has passed. We either renege or pay billions in reparations. As Harper said when Chretian signed this - its the worst and most costly treaty ever agreed to by Canada.

Posted by: Mike W | 2005-12-01 11:12:05 AM


The funniest (saddest?) thing is that Canada continues to lecture the US on climate change even after we massively failed to meet our Kyoto target, and even after US emissions rose less than ours.

The arrogance of the Canadian establishment is unbelievable.

Posted by: chip | 2005-12-01 12:16:10 PM


Virgil, you can't become GG you got the wrong plumbing !

Posted by: John R | 2005-12-01 12:17:30 PM


Mike W: "pay billions in reparations."

To whom? The UN? What are they going to do if we tell them to pound sand - write a strongly worded letter?

We should tell that bunch of corrupt, child-raping, moral-equivalizing, thug-worshipping genocide-enablers to pound sand just on general principles.

Posted by: Kathryn | 2005-12-01 12:37:14 PM


Simple case of bureaucrats getting everything completely ass backwards!
KYOTO accord is the product of Ass Backwards thinking and is discredited by science as useless attempt to placate environmental concerns of public.
Liberals signing accord is proof of incompetence!
Liberals bragging about accord is proof of stupidity!
Liberals failure to take any positive steps in environmental management is only to be expected!

Posted by: PGP | 2005-12-01 5:57:47 PM


As wrong as 10 million flies on a dung pile!

Posted by: PGP | 2005-12-02 6:33:18 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.