Lemmings: 56 of world's moonbat media print the same editorial


Pious nonsense

Pious nonsense

Even The Age doesn’t fall for it, sensibly preferring to rely on its own views rather than cutting and pasting other editors’ nonsense. And nonsense it most certainly is, written by the most lefty and greeny of the world’s newspapers, the UK Guardian. Full of pious platitudes and vacuous statements, it is a painful read:

Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet, and with it our prosperity and security. The dangers have been becoming apparent for a generation. Now the facts have started to speak: 11 of the past 14 years have been the warmest on record [“on record” being since about 1850, conveniently ignoring the MWP and the Roman warm period – Ed], the Arctic ice-cap is melting and last year’s inflamed oil and food prices provide a foretaste of future havoc. In scientific journals the question is no longer whether humans are to blame, but how little time we have got left to limit the damage [Haven’t read the CRU emails yet, then? – Ed]. Yet so far the world’s response has been feeble and half-hearted.

Climate change has been caused over centuries [yes, exactly, without any help from humans – Ed], has consequences that will endure for all time and our prospects of taming it will be determined in the next 14 days. We call on the representatives of the 192 countries gathered in Copenhagen not to hesitate, not to fall into dispute, not to blame each other but to seize opportunity from the greatest modern failure of politics. This should not be a fight between the rich world and the poor world, or between east and west. Climate change affects everyone, and must be solved by everyone.

“Taming” the climate? Really? Good luck with that! And then there is the inevitable rush towards global socialism, and the accompanying scaling back of Western economies:

Social justice demands that the industrialised world digs deep into its pockets and pledges cash to help poorer countries adapt to climate change, and clean technologies to enable them to grow economically without growing their emissions.

The transformation will be costly, but many times less than the bill for bailing out global finance — and far less costly than the consequences of doing nothing.

Many of us, particularly in the developed world, will have to change our lifestyles. The era of flights that cost less than the taxi ride to the airport is drawing to a close. We will have to shop, eat and travel more intelligently. We will have to pay more for our energy, and use less of it.

And in doing so, it will condemn billions of people in developing countries to a life of misery and poverty. Finally, the predictable, tired and hackneyed “green energy myth”:

But the shift to a low-carbon society holds out the prospect of more opportunity than sacrifice. Already some countries have recognized that embracing the transformation can bring growth, jobs and better quality lives. The flow of capital tells its own story: last year for the first time more was invested in renewable forms of energy than producing electricity from fossil fuels.

As if renewables can replace fossil fuels in the next 20 or even 50 years! It’s nothing short of a joke. And the biggest joke of all is that all of this will be pointless. The effect of CO2 emissions on the climate is so small that all the trillions of dollars that will be wasted as a result of any Copenhagen Treaty will make not an iota of difference. Just like Kyoto made no difference either. The climate will do what the climate will do, and there ain’t nothing we can do about it.

Pious climate nonsense.

Read it here.

Rudd the autograph hunter


Please Mr Obama!

Please Mr Obama!

Look where Barack Obama is, and there you’ll find our lap-dog Prime Minister, hanging on to the One’s coat-tails. So it’s no surprise that Rudd has changed his Copenhagen plans in response to Obama’s change of plan.

KEVIN Rudd has shelved plans for an early dash to Copenhagen after US President Barack Obama said he was not going until the late stages of the climate change conference, in the hope of closing a deal.

The White House announced over the weekend that Mr Obama would push back his visit to the conference until its final day, putting him in a better position to help broker an agreement.

Mr Rudd, who had the RAAF on standby for a snap trip to Denmark, will now attend the late stages of the conference.

Yesterday, a spokeswoman for Mr Rudd confirmed the Prime Minister had considered travelling to Copenhagen early, but said by Friday night it had been resolved Mr Rudd would attend during the final stages of the talks along with more than 100 heads of government.

It’s a great look for Australia abroad, you have to admit…

Read it here.

UK PM Gordon Brown: "We know the science."


Dumb and dumber

Dumb and dumber

Gordon Brown isn’t the sharpest tool in the bag, but he’s resorting to ever more desperate hyperbole in the lead up to Copenhagen. And he clearly hasn’t read the CRU exchanges either:

BRITISH Prime Minister Gordon Brown has led a chorus of condemnation against ”flat-earth” climate change sceptics who have tried to derail the Copenhagen summit by casting doubt on the evidence for global warming.

Sceptics in the UK and US have moved to capitalise on a series of hacked emails from climate change scientists at the University of East Anglia, England, claiming they show attempts to hide information that does not support the case for human activity causing rising temperatures.

On the eve of the Copenhagen summit, Saudi Arabia and Republican members of the US Congress have used the emails to claim the need for urgent action to cut carbon emissions has been undermined.

But on Friday Mr Brown, UK Environment Secretary Ed Miliband, and Ed Markey, co-author of the US climate change bill, joined forces to condemn the sceptics.

”With only days to go before Copenhagen we mustn’t be distracted by the behind-the-times, anti-science, flat-earth climate sceptics,’‘ Mr Brown said. ”We know the science. We know what we must do. We must now act and close the 5 billion-tonne gap. That will seal the deal.”

According to the British Government adviser Sir Nicholas Stern, 10 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions must be taken out of the atmosphere by 2020. So far agreement is in place for only half that amount.

Mr Miliband gave his most damning assessment of the sceptics yet, describing them as ”dangerous and deceitful”. He said: ”The approach of the climate saboteurs is to misuse data and mislead people. The sceptics are playing politics with science in a dangerous and deceitful manner. The evidence is clear and the time we have to act is short. To abandon this process now would lead to misery and catastrophe for millions.”

All of this would be hilarious, if it weren’t so serious. Here we have the prime minister of the UK, who hasn’t a clue about the scientific method, calling those who correctly question scientific data “flat earthers” – and Ed Miliband calling them “deceitful”. It’s nothing short of astonishing, and rather ironic given the deceit clearly going on in the AGW science community.

The reality is that Brown and Miliband are gullible fools, who believe anything and everything the IPCC, and all its scientists, tell them.

Read it here.

Stating the Obvious: carbon cuts "could hurt economy"


Herald Sun

Herald Sun

But hang on… surely this wonderful new green economy will create thousands of jobs, billions of dollars of investment, and everything in the environmental garden will by rosy, right? That’s what we’ve been told over and over again by the Rudd government, despite the fact that a bit of common sense would tell you that taxing energy will cause huge damage to any economy. Seems that it takes this long for the media to catch up with common sense:

IMF experts say the global economy stands to benefit from action against climate change, but warn that aggressive curbs on emissions could jeopardise the recovery without careful planning.

Days before a major climate summit gets underway in Copenhagen, the experts at the International Monetary Fund said a global pact would help the world’s poorest who face the worst effects of rising temperatures.

“Greater climate resilience can promote macroeconomic stability and alleviate poverty,” Michael Keen and Benjamin Jones of the global lender’s fiscal affairs department wrote in a staff position note.

But they also called for caution. They warned that sudden, large hikes in the costs of carbon emissions blamed for global warming could generate “unwelcome pressures on production costs and household incomes, thus dampening prospects for recovery”.

Preventing developing countries from using fossil fuels will consign millions if not billions of people back into a life of poverty – it’s a simple as that. There is no green economy panacea – it’s a myth.

Read it here.

"Carbon intensity" – the new fudge factor


Tricked by carbon intensity

Tricked by carbon intensity

The media is full of headlines praising India and China for agreeing to cut carbon by this percentage or that percentage, but it’s only when you read down that you realise that they are referring to carbon intensity, which is carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP.

So when China says it will cut carbon by 40% by 2020, what it means is that it will actually increase emissions by about 25%, because GDP in developing countries such as China is going through the roof, but which is 40% less than it would have been.

And yet the media seem unable to see through the trick, reporting it as if it’s big news:

INDIA aims to reduce its carbon intensity by 2020 by up to 25 per cent compared with 2005, the country’s Environment Minister has announced, echoing similar commitments by China and the US before the Copenhagen climate change conference.

Jairam Ramesh reiterated India’s refusal to accept legally binding targets for reducing its carbon emissions or to agree to Western demands to set a date for when its emissions would peak. But he did announce a target for India’s unilateral efforts to reduce the quantity of carbon dioxide it produces per unit of GDP — known as its carbon intensity — and said that India would show flexibility at the summit.

The announcement was seen as a major shift in India’s negotiating position.

“The Planning Commission has concluded that we can have a 20 to 25 per cent reduction in emission intensity between 2005 and 2020,” Mr Ramesh said in a speech outlining India’s position at next week’s summit.

So whereas countries like the UK have unilaterally committed economic suicide by legislating an 80% reduction in actual emissions by 2050, India and China merely commit to increase emissions, but more slowly.

Read it here.

Even James Hansen wants Copenhagen to fail


Hansen (L), Homer (R)

Hansen (L), Homer (R)

And with Al Gore pulling out of a $1,200-a-head presentation, things aren’t looking that hot:

The scientist who convinced the world that global warming was a looming danger says the planet will be better off if next week’s Copenhagen climate change summit ends in collapse.

James Hansen, considered the most distinguished climate scientist [Ha, ha! My aching sides – Ed], says any agreement to emerge from the meeting will be so flawed that it would be better to start again from scratch.

His words came on the same day as the University of East Anglia announced an investigation into the thousands of damaging leaked emails emanating from its Climatic Research Unit.

Professor Hansen heads the NASA Goddard Institute earth sciences unit in New York. In 1989 he made several appearances before Congress and did more than any other scientist to educate [“brainwash” – Ed] politicians about the causes of global warming and the urgent need to change behaviour.

Earlier this year, he was awarded the Carl Gustaf Rossby Research Medal by the American Meteorological Society. It was awarded for his outstanding contribution to climate modelling and for clear communication of climate science in the public arena. [The ABC is in full hyperbole mode here, as you can see – Ed]

He certainly was not mincing his words when he gave his views to the Guardian newspaper online about the prospects for next week’s climate change conference.

“The approach that’s being talked about is so fundamentally wrong that it’s better to reassess the situation,” he said.

“I think it’s just as well that we not have a substantive treaty.”

Advice to Copenhagen delegates. Save the airfare, save the CO2, stay at home instead.

Read it here.

Climate madness from "Lord" Stern


Stern: Bonkers

Stern: Bonkers

Just to remind us all that the defeat of the ETS will not stop the bandwagon of global warming alarmism, Lord Stern (he of the woefully flawed Stern Report of 2006 – read pages 24 – 29 Lawrence Solomon’s The Deniers for the full story of just how woeful it is) has weighed in with yet more hysterics:

The Copenhagen summit is the world’s last chance to save the planet from “catastrophic” global warming, according to a major study led by Lord Stern of Brentford, the country’s leading authority on climate change.

Without an international agreement to limit global warming, temperatures are likely to rise by 9F (5C) by the end of the century – triggering mass migration, warfare and world hunger, according to the report.

Stern’s an economist. If he’s the UK’s leading authority on climate, heaven help the UK. And clearly there’s no vested interest, because he has no interest in any climate change organisation… no, wait:

Lord Stern, who is now chairman of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change, said world leaders at Copenhagen must agree to cut emissions while also providing a “global” fund to help poor countries of at least £30 billion per annum by 2015 and rising to £120 billion during the 2020s. (source)

Must keep the bandwagon rolling, to keep the paycheques rolling in. And if that wasn’t enough, Stern then goes on to produce a detailed and cogent rebuttal of climate change sceptic arguments… well, guess what, no he doesn’t – he calls them “muddled” instead (‘cos that’s a bit easier):

“This is evidence that is overwhelming, from all sources, that’s the kind of climate science we’re talking about,” he said.

“I think it is very important that those with any kind of views on the science or economics have their say – that does not mean that unscientific muddle also has the right to be recognised as searing insight.”

He added: “If they are muddled and confused, they do not have the right to be described as anything other than muddled and confused.” (source)

I’m literally blown away by the power of that argument from the UK’s “leading climate authority on climate change”. I’m sure you are too.

UK: Australia's ETS defeat "threatens Copenhagen"


Sunk - by the Aussies!

Sunk - by the Aussies!

It’s the gift that keeps on giving! News of the ETS defeat has spread far and wide. Not only have we sunk the domestic ETS, but the UK Telegraph reports that our actions might scupper any remaining vestiges of a chance of a deal at Copenhagen:

Australia has dealt a major blow to any international deal on climate change ahead of the Copenhagen summit by failing to introduce new laws to control pollution.

The carbon trading bill, which has been rejected by parliament, would have set up one of the world’s biggest “cap and trade” markets.

The scheme works by limiting the amount of greenhouse gases industry can produce and forcing them to pay money for any extra emissions by trading with other companies.

But the Australian Senate, that is already deeply divided over the science of climate change, voted down the new legislation.

It is not only damaging to Kevin Rudd, the country’s Prime Minister, but could scupper efforts to control greenhouse gases on a wider scale at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen later this month.

Mr Rudd was seen as a leading advocate of tackling climate change on the world stage and was on his way back from a meeting with President Obama on the issue when news of the defeat came through.

Frank Jotzo, an Australian National University expert on international climate change negotiations, said the failure of Australia to introduce legislation will make developing countries less likely to agree to cut their own emissions.

“It’s not like the talks will stall because of the lack of an Australian emissions trading scheme,” he said. “But if the legislation had been passed, that would have sent a very positive signal internationally and, in particular, to developing countries.”

I am looking forward to Rudd’s forlorn entrance to Copenhagen – empty handed.

Read it here.

ETS voted down in Senate


Breaking News: the Senate has voted down the ETS. Climate sense prevails, at least for now.

I almost feel sorry for Penny Wong – well, actually, not really. It was bad law, rushed through without proper scrutiny in order to provide Kevin Rudd with a trophy to take to Copenhagen.

India "dismisses Danish climate proposal"


Non-event of 2009

Non-event of 2009

But, but, but… India and China are on board, surely? Surely Obama just went over there and charmed the pants off them all and everything in the garden was rosy, but now what’s happened? I really wish we’d voted Turnbull back in, because then Australia would turn up to Copenhagen with a shiny new ETS, and it would make all the difference!

Top Indian officials dismissed a draft climate change proposal by Denmark that expects developing economies to peak their greenhouse gas emissions by 2025, news reports said Monday.

The draft document was circulated to a few countries ahead of the Dec. 7-18 UN climate conference in Copenhagen, which is supposed to draw up an agreement for controlling emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases [which probably aren’t] causing global warming.

Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh said the Danish draft was “totally unacceptable,” The Economic Times reported.

“We are never going to take on a peaking year for absolute emissions. This is not on the horizon,” Ramesh told the Danes, according to the newspaper.

So China’s cut of 40% isn’t a cut at all (it’s an increase), India isn’t interested either, the US isn’t going to pass any legislation anytime soon (if at all). Copenhagen is shaping up to be a complete non-event.

Read it here.