The Wall Street Journal expertly pulls apart the climate change hubris at the G8 in an excellent opinion piece. Not only have the G8 moved away from setting emissions targets in favour of setting nebulous climate targets (2˚C temperature rise above pre-industrial levels), but there are so many caveats and exclusions that the end result is basically the square root of sweet FA.

When King Canute of lore wanted to teach his citizens a lesson, he set his throne by the seashore and commanded the tides to roll out. Canute’s spirit was back in business this week at the G-8 summit in Italy, where the assembled leaders declared that the world’s temperature shall not rise: “We recognize the scientific view that the increase in global average temperature above pre-industrial levels ought not to exceed 2 degrees [Celsius],” or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, said the summit declaration.

So let it be written, so let it be done.

As for how they will achieve this climate-defying feat, well, the leaders were somewhat less definitive: “we will work . . . to identify a global goal for substantially reducing global emissions by 2050.”

Translation: Since the heads of the world’s leading economies couldn’t agree on an actual policy on climate change, they opted instead to command the clouds, the seas and all of the Earth to cool. Or maybe they were finally admitting that this whole climate business is getting too expensive, so let’s just throw out a goal that everyone knows is beyond the reach of kings, much less democratic leaders.

Read it all here.

Picked up by a stray microphone at L’Aquila, Rudd’s unguarded comment to Danish Prime Minister, Lars Lokke Rasmussen:

Right now I don’t think we are on track to get an agreement at Copenhagen.

Read it here.

I heard this in the middle of the night on ABC News Radio, and I should have written it down, because guess what, it isn’t anywhere to be found in the mainstream media. All the stories are talking about how IPCC head Rajendra Pachauri was “cautiously optimistic” about progress at L’Aquila.

But this is the quote nobody wants you to read, which I found as a transcript on a Chinese web site. In it Pachauri refers to the lack of a baseline against which to measure the 80% cut by 2050:

“It’s pretty ridiculous if you ask me, I mean I’m surprised I didn’t see the fallacy that they were introducing in this pledge by not defining the baseline at least. How can you say you will achieve a cut of ‘x’ amount if you don’t even define what the baseline is, what the benchmark is?”

If anyone can find a reliable source of this quote, please let me know. You can listen to an MP3 of the quote here.

As always, a great read!

Always the last refuge of someone who hasn’t a clue what they are talking about, speaking in long complicated words which actually mean nothing is Rudd’s speciality.

While addressing German press and Chancellor Angela Merkel, Mr Rudd said it was unlikely any progress [on climate change] would emerge from the Major Economies Forum “by way of detailed programmatic specificity”.

The line had German translators scrambling for a meaning.

It also has this particular native English speaker scrambling for a meaning as well…

When asked about the Prime Minister’s choice of words today, Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull said Mr Rudd would be better to use clear, plain English.

Mr Turnbull admitted he personally had “no idea what (programmatic specificity) means”.

“As I understand it, I heard part of his speech was not only incomprehensible in English, but so incomprehensible the German translators were unable to translate,” Mr Turnbull said.

Read it here.

… and by wrecking western economies with pointless emissions reduction schemes, somehow overcome nature and stop temperatures rising more than 2 degrees C.

The aim, agreed at a G8 summit in the central Italian town of L’Aquila, is to cut overall world emissions by 50 per cent in order to limit global warming to no more than two degrees Celsius, a declaration said.

But the world’s largest emitters, including China and India, have backtracked, and are refusing to cut emissions by 50% by 2050.

Major polluting nations meeting at a G8 summit in Italy have dropped a pledge to halve global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, a European Union official said.

“There is indeed a very strong commitment to identify the global goal for substantially reducing global emissions by 2050, but there is no 50 per cent” mentioned in a draft declaration, the official said on condition of anonymity.

All of which means that anything the developed world does will be even more pointless that we first thought.

Read it here and here.

ACM’s favourite journo, from the “it’s all happening faster than we expected” department, all based on flaky models, of course:

Climate change is occurring faster than predicted across the Snowy Mountains, but little research is being funded by governments and universities to track its impact, scientists say.

CSIRO climate modelling predicts an 8 per cent decline in rain and snowfall across the mountains by 2020, with an average temperature rise of up to 1 degree.

Under this ”worst-case” trend, temperature would rise by 2.6 degrees by 2050, with a 97 per cent loss of snow cover lasting at least two months.

But studies of snow records by NSW parks scientist Ken Green show average snow depths in some areas are already tracking at, or close to, levels predicted for 2020.

”We’ve arrived roughly a decade before we were supposed to get there,” he said.

Yawn. Read it here.

But don’t expect anything important to be decided – these are just talks about talks, after all. Still, it’s a nice jolly to Italy in the Northern hemisphere summer, where Rudd can pretend that he’s important, rubbing shoulders with leaders of the other 16 countries in the Major Economies Forum. It doesn’t change the fact that the whole thing is a pointless waste of effort, and spews more CO2 into the air than any agreement will probably ever save:

The MEF leaders will consider signing an agreement to stop global temperatures rising by more than two degrees Celsius, a level many scientists consider potentially disastrous for the environment.

The MEF, which includes emerging economies of China, India, South Africa, Mexico and Brazil as well as the powerful G8 members, will also be asked to back the “aspirational” goal of halving emissions by 2050.

But after holding talks in Berlin yesterday, Mr Rudd and Ms Merkel said while they hoped the MEF would make progress towards a global goal for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it would be up to leaders at the United Nations climate change meeting in Copenhagen in December to sign off on a new pact to limit global emissions.

Mr Rudd said it was “highly unlikely” the MEF would come up with a detailed plan to slash emissions by a certain time.

“That is what Copenhagen is about,” he said.

So what exactly is all this about? Answers on a postcard… no don’t bother.

Read it here.

I wonder if the people that write these reports ever look out the window? Or look at the global temperature record? As is common today in climate science, the output from flaky models replaces empirical observation – it’s true: models actually replace reality. And of course, Fairytale-facts prints it all, unquestioningly.

MOST of the gains made by the world’s poorest countries over the past half a century will be lost unless action is taken on climate change, Oxfam says.

A report by the international aid agency says up to 375 million people may be affected by climate-related disasters by 2015.

“Climate change is becoming quite rapidly the central issue to do with poverty today“, Oxfam Australia’s chief, Andrew Hewett, told the Herald. “That also raises deep ethical dilemmas because the people least responsible for this crisis have the least resources to deal with it, and they are also those who are on the front line.”

We will have to suffer the endless reports from the G8 summit in the days ahead. All the usual climate clowns will be there – Obama, UK’s Gordon Brown, Rudd & Wong – spouting their usual brand of nonsense, including laughably regarding the climate as if a quick twiddle on the ‘CO2 dial’ will miraculously adjust the temperature, like turning down the electric blanket:

A key issue at both [G8 and major “polluters”] meetings will be whether the US President, Barack Obama, publicly embraces the scientific goal [Scientific? Don’t make me laugh – Ed] of keeping the world’s temperature from rising above 2 degrees Celsius in order to avoid dangerous climate change.

Note the use of the word “polluters” again, in order to obfuscate and mislead the public (and, clearly, the media). I am all for reducing pollution. CO2 is not pollution. CO2 is plant food. Got it? Barking madness.

Read it here.

Those readers in Melbourne are invited by the Climate Sceptics Party to attend a protest against Al Gore’s Safe Climate breakfast next Monday.

Press Release – The Climate Sceptics
Monday 6th July, 2009

Those attending the “Safe Climate” 7am breakfast with Al Gore on Monday July 13th will be met by a peaceful educational protest where they will be greeted by signs showing graphs and reasons why CO2 is not the main cause of climate change.

Leon Ashby, president of the new political party “The Climate Sceptics” is organising the event for anyone doubting CO2 is the cause of climate changes to attend and put their voice to say the science is not settled and a proper debate must occur before any country signs up to an emissions trading scheme.

The centenary medal recipient for services to the environment will lead the educational protest calling for Al Gore to admit his movie contained significant factual errors and, since Arctic ice is now back at 1980 levels and the Earth has stopped warming, the idea that rising CO2 causes runaway global warming is false.

Mr Ashby is asking for members of the public who are doubtful that human carbon emissions are causing catastrophic global warming to join the protest with their own placards. Leaflets with 10 questions that Al Gore needs to answer will be handed to those attending the breakfast with Al Gore.

Anyone wanting to attend the protest can visit The Climate Sceptics web site (www.climatesceptics.com.au) for more details or meet on Harbor Esplanade outside Etihad Stadium in Melbourne Docklands at 6.15 am on Monday 13th July.

http://www.climatesceptics.com.au
contact: info@climatesceptics.com.au
—
Steve Murphy
The Climate Sceptics – advocating open scientific debate.
http://www.climatesceptics.com.au