UN: Biodiversity crisis worse than climate change


Hysteria Co., Inc.

As I predicted here, the UN can see what it thought was its free ticket to global government (climate change) disappearing before its very eyes, so it is now on the lookout for another cause through which to regulate, tax and generally interfere in the lives of ordinary people – and here it is:

The economic case for global action to stop the destruction of the natural world is even more powerful than the argument for tackling climate change, a major report for the United Nations will declare this summer.

The Stern report on climate change, which was prepared for the UK Treasury and published in 2007, famously claimed that the cost of limiting climate change would be around 1%-2% of annual global wealth, but the longer-term economic benefits would be 5-20 times that figure.

The UN’s biodiversity report – dubbed the Stern for Nature – is expected to say that the value of saving “natural goods and services”, such as pollination, medicines, fertile soils, clean air and water, will be even higher – between 10 and 100 times the cost of saving the habitats and species which provide them.

Read it here.

Will Alexander: RIP climate change


South African UN scientist Will Alexander writes the death notice for “global warming” hysteria in his final memo:

CLIMATE CHANGE

may it

REST IN PEACE

1. Provably false assumption that human activities can influence global climate for which there is no scientifically believable evidence.

2. Provably false assumption that the increases in global temperatures are the cause of climatic changes. Multiyear variations in global climate are driven by variations in the receipt and poleward redistribution of solar energy via the atmospheric and oceanic processes, not temperature variations. This is high school physics.

3. Complete lack of numeracy skills and logical deductions by the climate change adherents.

4. Deliberate manipulation of climate change science to suit political objectives.

In memoriam

Read it here (PDF) h/t Climate Realists

New UN climate chief appointed


New UN climate chief

You can hardly blame Yvo de Boer for stepping down after the unmitigated disaster that was Copenhagen (see here). So the hospital pass has been handed to Costa Rican Christiana Figueres:

Figueres, 53, the choice of U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, is the first leader of the U.N. climate change secretariat to come from a developing country. She will take over from Dutchman Yvo de Boer from July 1.

She beat fellow short-listed candidate Marthinus van Schalkwyk, a former South African environment minister, for a position meant to rally global accord on a successor to the Kyoto Protocol after a disappointing summit in Copenhagen last December.

Announcing the appointment, U.N. spokesman Martin Nesirky said Figueres “brings to this position a passion for the issue, deep knowledge of the stakeholders and valuable hands-on experience with the public sector, non-profit sector and private sector.”

The scale of Figueres’ task is underscored by a Copenhagen summit where 120 world leaders failed to reach a binding deal, pledging instead to mobilize $30 billion from 2010-2012 to help poor countries deal with droughts and floods, and to try to limit warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius.

In an interview with Reuters after her appointment, Figueres said the world can salvage a new deal to combat global warming but this was not a priority for 2010. Rich countries must first fulfill their pledges on climate aid, she said.

“Parties need to prove to themselves that issues already on the table, such as fast-tracking financing, that’s not just on paper but can also be delivered. That’s the focus of Cancun,” she said. (source)

New face, same old story.

UN: The fount of all hysteria


Hysteria Co., Inc

If it’s not climate it will be something else. The UN is watching its plan for world government through climate alarmism disappear in smoke, as the public realise that there are more important things to worry about, like erupting volcanoes and Greek financial crises and Islamic terrorism. So it’s now looking elsewhere for some other “cause” via which to regulate, tax and control the globe. This time it’s the extinction of species. As you read this report, just notice how often they have simply taken the climate alarmists’ dictionary, and applied it to extinctions:

  • “Business as usual no longer an option”
  • World needs a “new vision”
  • “Sustainable future”
  • “Tipping points”
  • “Irreversible” damage to the planet unless we “act now”

As the Sydney Morning Herald breathlessly reports:

KEY natural processes that sustain human life, such as crop production and clean water, face a high risk of ”rapid degradation and collapse” because of the record rate of extinction of animal and plant species.

That is the key finding of a major United Nations report, the third edition of the Global Biodiversity Outlook.

The executive-secretary of the UN’s Convention on Biological Diversity, Ahmed Djoghlaf, said: ”The news is not good. We continue to lose biodiversity at a rate never before seen in history – extinction rates may be up to 1000 times higher than the historical background rate.

”Business as usual is no longer an option if we are to avoid irreversible damage to the life-support systems of our planet.”

The Secretary-General of the UN, Ban Ki-moon, said the world needed a ”new vision for biological diversity for a healthy planet and a sustainable future for humankind”.

The outlook finds extinction rates of plant and animal species will continue and potentially accelerate far above the natural rate across this century. Threatened species are on average moving closer to extinction due to the impact of humans and climate change. Coral and amphibians are under the most stress.

The report states that if the rate of species extinction hits crucial ”tipping points,” not yet identified, there is a high risk that natural systems that help crops grow and keep water clean could be damaged irreversibly. (source)

Just replace the word “extinction” with “climate change” and we’ve heard it all before. So the next logical steps will be:

  • develop computer models that predict that species extinctions will rapidly get out of hand (just ask Michael Mann for his cast offs)
  • tweak those models to demonstrate that extinctions are directly related to something easily regulated, such as land use
  • ensure that the models play down all other factors, especially those that are natural in origin
  • organise regular conferences to decide that the world needs to “urgently tackle extinctions”
  • describe extinctions as “the greatest moral challenge of our time”
  • require countries to sign a treaty promising not to expand land use, unless they pay a new “land tax”
  • companies can trade permits to build on undeveloped land in a Land Trading Scheme
  • in no time at all, fraudsters will account for 90% of all trading on the Land Permit exchanges

and we’re back to square one.

Think I’m kidding? Just you wait!

UPDATE: And of course the Greens can’t wait to jump on any passing bandwagon. Cue Bob Brown:

Humanity is sealing its own fate by rapidly destroying the planet’s ecological diversity, the Australian Greens have warned.

“It’s not going to change while we have governments who don’t care and governments who are making things worse,” [Brown] told reporters in Canberra on Tuesday.

It is a prescription for our own fate if we don’t stop to consider the value, of least to ourselves, of wildlife and biodiversity.” (source)

UN to investigate ClimateGate


Hardly impartial…

Hardly impartial…

Amazingly, the ABC did report this one! Don’t hold your breath, it will be the IPCC effectively investigating itself, so we can be pretty sure it will be a whitewash.

A top UN panel is to probe claims that British scientists sought to suppress data backing climate change sceptics’ views, its head said ahead of the the landmark Copenhagen summit.

Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said the claims – which led a top expert to leave his post temporarily this week – were serious and needed to be investigated.

Professor Phil Jones has stood aside as head of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, after emails allegedly calling into question the scientific basis for climate change fears were leaked onto the internet.

Hackers [It ain’t no hacker. This was an inside job – Ed] penetrated the centre’s network and posted online thousands of emails from researchers, including Professor Jones, ahead of the Copenhagen summit which starts Monday.

The CRU at the university in Norwich, eastern England, is a world-leader in the field. [Maybe that should be “was” – Ed]

Dr Pachauri, head of the Nobel Prize-winning United Nations panel since 2002, told BBC radio: “We will certainly go into the whole lot and then we will take a position on it.

“We certainly don’t want to brush anything under the carpet. This is a serious issue and we will look into it in detail.” (source)

I won’t hold my breath. And at the same time, Australian scientists are doing just that: brushing it all under the carpet and hoping it will go away – all lovingly reported by the Sydney Morning Herald:

Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, professor of marine science at the University of Queensland, said a few out-of-context quotes gained by illegally trawling through ”electronic garbage” did not undermine the huge amount of peer-reviewed scientific data on climate change.

”I think the denialist movement is so desperate, given the overwhelming conclusions of the science, that they’ll do anything,” he said. (source)

I think we all know who’s in denial now, Ove.

Ban Ki-moon: no deal in Copenhagen


Even the UN is conceding that there is not a hope of a binding agreement in Copenhagen:

A LEGALLY binding agreement on cutting greenhouse gas emissions is no longer a realistic goal for next month’s Copenhagen summit on climate change, the UN Secretary-General says.

According to Ban Ki-moon, an agreement will not be signed next month, and the most likely outcome is voluntary reduction targets, which countries could announce but then ignore.

Several key countries were not ready to sign up to binding targets [including the US – Ed] and the best the world could hope for from the summit would be “political commitments“, Mr Ban said yesterday.

If political commitments is all that can be expected, please tell me again why Kevin Rudd and Penny Wong are pushing for binding emissions reductions when the rest of the world will be waiting to see what happens? But Mr Moon(bat) at least uses the opportunity to talk yet more nonsense about the climate:

Mr Ban suggested the target for limiting the global temperature increase to 2C above pre-industrial levels might have to be adjusted because it could still result in sea-level rises inundating many small islands.

“These small-island developing countries say it should be a maximum of 1.5C. For them, it’s a matter of life and death.”

Uh oh, here we go. Should have seen this coming. 2C isn’t enough anymore, we’re down to 1.5C. Next week it’ll be 1C, then zero … well you see where we’re going here. In any case, tell me again why reducing the target to 1.5C will stop islands sinking because of tectonic influences?

Read it here.