It’s all a grand charade — the matinee show put on by the Theater of Science was merely being used for the Grand Extravaganza called the Theater of Politics.
Wikileaks, not surprisingly, turned up some not-so-diplomatic and not-so-scientific goings-on in the political race to steer power and dollars.
The US diplomatic cables reveal how the US seeks dirt on nations opposed to its approach to tackling global warming; how financial and other aid is used by countries to gain political backing; how distrust, broken promises and creative accounting dog negotiations; and how the US mounted a secret global diplomatic offensive to overwhelm opposition to the controversial “Copenhagen accord“, the unofficial document that emerged from the ruins of the Copenhagen climate change summit in 2009.
Negotiating a climate treaty is a high-stakes game, not just because of the danger warming poses to civilisation but also because re-engineering the global economy to a low-carbon model will see the flow of billions of dollars redirected.
The wrangling behind the scenes involve the usual offerings of pork-barreling type funding for piddling little projects — like $50 million dollar projects in the Maldives, or $30 million in aid for Bolivia — to win support for the weak non-binding Copenhagen Accord, which suited the US. Thus the $2 trillion market was being made and unmade by votes bought with the spare change from carbon trades during morning tea.
Even the Saudis were asking for a handout:
Perhaps the most audacious appeal for funds revealed in the cables is from Saudi Arabia, the world’s second biggest oil producer and one of the 25 richest countries in the world. A secret cable sent on 12 February records a meeting between US embassy officials and lead climate change negotiator Mohammad al-Sabban. “The kingdom will need time to diversify its economy away from petroleum, [Sabban] said, noting a US commitment to help Saudi Arabia with its economic diversification efforts would ‘take the pressure off climate change negotiations‘.”
The Saudi’s were worried they might have missed the gravy train:
The assistant petroleum minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman told US officials that he had told his minister Ali al-Naimi that Saudi Arabia had “missed a real opportunity to submit ‘something clever’, like India or China, that was not legally binding but indicated some goodwill towards the process without compromising key economic interests”.
In the end, it’s mostly what we all suspected anyway. Call me a cynic, but did anyone believe that atmospheric research really affected the political decisions?
The political wheeling and dealing behind the scenes is where the big moves occur:
The cables obtained by WikiLeaks finish at the end of February 2010. Today, 116 countries have associated themselves with the accord. Another 26 say they intend to associate. That total, of 140, is at the upper end of a 100-150 country target revealed by Pershing in his meeting with Hedegaard on 11 February.
The wikileaks material shows again that voting at these COP meetings is nothing to do with the science put forward in the IPCC reports (which in turn are not based on the scientific method, or what wide body of the worlds scientists actually said anyway).
It all merely proves that the best protection for the people of Planet Earth is to have many competing democratic governments, none of which can gain too much power over many of the others. The UN process of mock democracy plays a dangerous game, where buying off single officials in tin-pot countries is a cheaper form of pork barrelling than the domestic politics of large Western election campaigns.
More sordid details are exposed in The Guardian:
WikiLeaks cables reveal how US manipulated climate accord
Embassy dispatches show America used spying, threats, and promises of aid to get support for a Copenhagen accord.
US goes to Basics over Copenhagen accord tactics
WikiLeaks cables show US admiration for how emerging economies work together to achieve common short-term goals.
WikiLeaks cables: Cancún climate talks doomed to fail, says EU president
Herman van Rompuy dismisses the Copenhagen climate summit as ‘incredible disaster’ and expects Cancún to be no better.
The third article implies this all could be just another incarnation of the long silent trading war going on for power between the EU and the USA.
Thanks to Ecotretas and Oliver S.
Ms Nova:
Thank you for the extracts from ‘Wikileaks’.
But none of this is news. All who have been following these matters have known all of it for years. And none of the participants in these matters have pretended other than the extracts state. Indeed, I discussed the Saudi situation with Saudi representatives at an IPCC meeting in 2002.
Only AGW-alarmists have been deluded into thinking otherwise: they have deluded themselves but nobody else.
Richard
20
I find it incredibly interesting that the talking heads from the right AND the left find the leaks abhorrent. They are calling the leak treason and are asking for the head of WidkiLeaks to be served on a platter.
The political elite of both sides are into the corruption, graft, and theft of public funds up to their eyeballs. They have been caught in the act. Like all sociopaths, they believe the only thing they did wrong was to get caught.
The global political structure is at war with reality. We are not just to be collateral damage, we are the intended victims. They are selling out modern civilization and mankind for not much more than a glazed doughnut and a hot cup of coffee.
A pox on all of their houses! Come to think of it, the pox is being delivered. First it was ClimateGate and now it’s WikiGate. More power to the leakers who expose the thugs for what they are!
10
Jo says..
OK, Jo you’re a cynic.
Hmmm, would that make me the pot or the kettle? Customers, I find myself in a dillema.
10
Whilst it is gratifying to read these leaks, which only reinforce what we sceptics have been saying all along – it really makes the heart sink to read some of the comments on the Guardian website from the deluded socialist commenters. Such comments as “this plays into the hands of the deniers” makes me want to weep. The proverbial Emperor is waving his d[snip] in their faces – and still they cannot see that he has no clothes.
10
It is FIFA like drama and unfortunately soccer shenannigans seem to have a greater grip on the general publics’ imagination.
10
The Greens who stole Christmas………..
THIS DEMONSTRATES HOW EVIL THESE GREEN COMMUNISTS REALLY ARE!!!!!
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_greens_who_stole_christmas/
10
Richard S Courtney: # 1
Richard, with the greatest respect, all who have been following these matters have strongly suspected most of it for years. The cables, if verifiable, would demonstrate that our analysis was correct. They certainly fill in a lot of the details, and they contain a few surprises as well.
Of course it is all about power – in geopolitics there is nothing else – money, trade, war, alliances, deception, natural resources, treaties, activist organisations – are all simply tools to be applied in the great game.
It has always been about power apportionment. Historically the game was played directly between national rivals (England and France, Denmark and Holland, NATO and the USSR, et cetera), But now we see the political elite entering into the game as independent agents through the auspices of the United Nations. These are the wild-cards (the “chaotic sprites”) in the equation, and they change the game dramatically because whereas geopolitical moves previously took decades to unfold, the individual players are mortal and are therefore in a great hurry to grab what power they can, and as quickly as possible. There is no such thing as a powerful corpse.
The sad thing is that Wikileaks have gone a step too far in taking on the US State Department. They will have Assange’s head on a plate if they can do so legally, or his body on a slab if they cannot.
There are also those who see contrarians and sceptics as being thorns in their side, and may use the release of these cables as a rationale to regulate and control the internet – under the auspices of the United Nations, of course.
And where would we be then, dear friends?
10
Green madness and Gillard’s dithering will hike your power bills
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/green_madness_and_gillards_dithering_will_hike_your_power_bills/
10
It’s boring! Everything is in perfect accordance to our denialistic assumptions. No surprise! It’s like a bad detective story in which you know who is the murder from the first page.
10
David, UK: # 4
Hmm, I hope that administered an anaesthetic before doing that [snip] … 😉
10
But the proponents march forward and on. They now even blame normal erosion on their global warming. And we still have to believe their scare mongering
See: http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/erosion-threatens-mt-taranaki-3943334
10
I was waiting to find out what wikileaks said about climate change, thanks for this.
l wonder if the papers will publish this or avoid the climate related emails
Enclosed is the NY times take on wikileaks and climategate,
“The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won’t be posted here.”–New York Times, on the Climategate emails, Nov. 20, 2009
“The articles published today and in coming days are based on thousands of United States embassy cables, the daily reports from the field intended for the eyes of senior policy makers in Washington. . . . The Times believes that the documents serve an important public interest, illuminating the goals, successes, compromises and frustrations of American diplomacy in a way that other accounts cannot match.”–New York Times, on the WikiLeaks documents, Nov. 29, 2010.
Keep up the good fight.
Amr
10
The UN is the home of the progressive. That is where redistribution of wealth without effort is encouraged, where multiculturalism is developed and where turning the other cheek becomes one directional rotation. The simple way for this to end is for the contributing nations to stop contributing and like a body on life support when the switch is flipped the UN will just wither and die. It’s only the evil west that makes the major contributions and all the scoundrels that benefit. The UN has not stopped one war, it’s raison d’etre, nor has it stopped one ethnic cleansing or in fact done anything of consequence. It is a parasite in danger of killing it’s host.
The conservatives are fighting back it would seem, even in Austria. http://ace.mu.nu/archives/308943.php
10
I’d suggest when it comes tothis sort of activity any science is irrelevant.
Monaey and power are at play here, and have been for years. Science was/is just the trigger. And to be honest, it doesn’t surprise me it has all developed into a power grab. the sciene is rubbish. If thescience was any good, it’d be too booring to pay attention to. 🙂
10
Rereke Whaakaro:
At #7 you say to me:
OK, I will bite because I am genuinely interested.
What “surprises” and previously unknown “details” have you identified?
Richard
10
And all of this over something that you can only describe by juxtaposing the letters B and S. It’s always just about power in the end.
10
Wikileaks reveal so much more in our ever so democratic societies. Mr Assange for all intents and purposes should be brought before a justice to set the records straight, but how is that supposed to happen when he is the only one in Interpol’s whole history that has become hunted planet wide for a supposed crime there even ain’t an official, by the supposed victim, complaint from, nor any evidence but word against word.
Yet now even the Australian stasi government wants to withdraw his fundamental legal rights to identification instead of protecting their own from a supposed friend that spies upon them and their citizens.
However it is mighty fine to know that the Australian government would have behaved equally “good” if the diplomatic leaks came from North Korea and Iran, because that’s what’s it all about right, as have been stated.
The communists and other authoritarian governments applaud all you.
10
For the Guardian crowd to be amazed at what has been revealed in the Wikileaks documents just shows how naive they are. If Wikileaks did a release of docs. from Greenpeace or WWF we would see evidence of similar “behind the scenes ” game playing — no less corrupt or manipulative.
As for Cancun, it looks like it is more interesting to note who is NOT there as opposed to who is there. Henry Waxman ( “Mr Cap and Trade”) was too busy with business in Congress to attend !!
10
o/t but…
Global Warming… no Global Cooling… no Global Warming…NO, IT’S COOLING!
Global Cooling:
“The discoveries of changes in the sun’s heat and the southward advance of glaciers in recent years have given rise to conjectures of the possible advent of a new ice age.” Time Magazine, September 10, 1924.
“MacMillan Reports Signs of New Ice Age” The New York Times, September 18, 1923
“The possibility of another Ice age already having started… is admitted by men of first rank in the scientific world, men specifically qualified to speak.” The Los Angeles Times, June 28, 1923
Global Warming:
“Gaffers who claim that winters were harder when they were boys are quite right… weather men have no doubt that the world at least for the time being is growing warmer.” Time Magazine, Jan. 2, 1939
“America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-Year Rise” The New York Times, March 27, 1933
“Permafrost in Russia is receding northward up to 100 yards per year.” Time Magazine, 1951
“Winters are getting milder, summers drier. Glaciers are receding, deserts growing.” U.S. News and World Report, Jan. 8, 1954
Global Cooling…. Again?
“Scientists Ponder Why World’s Climate is Changing; A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable” The New York Times, May 21, 1975
“Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another Ice Age.” Time Magazine, June 24, 1974
“North Atlantic sea temperatures declined, and shipping routes were cluttered with ice. Furthermore, the permafrost in Russia and Canada was advancing southward.” The New York Times, December 29, 1974
“There is very important climatic change going on right now… It is something that, if it continues, will affect the whole human occupation of the earth—- like a billion people starving. Fortune Magazine, from Reid Bryson, February 1974
Back to Global Warming…..Confused Yet??
“About 10 million residents of Bangladesh will lose their homes and means of sustenance because of the rising sea level, due to global warming, in the next few decades.” Al Gore, from ‘Earth in Balance” 1992
“Billions will die,” says Lovelock, who tells us he is not normally a gloomy type. Human civilization will be reduced to a “broken rabble ruled by brutal warlords”, and the plague-ridden remainder of the species will flee the cracked and broken earth to the Arctic, the last temperate spot, where a few breeding couples will survive. The Daily Telegraph, February 2, 2006
check it out with links at
http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/media-manipulation/8223-global-warming-no-global-cooling-no-global-warmingno-its-cooling?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+climatechangefraud%2FnkcO+%28Climate+Change+Dispatch+news%29
10
val majkus @19,
Isn’t that why they call it climate disruption? /sarc off
10
The third article implies this all could be just another incarnation of the long silent trading war going on for power between the EU and the USA.
Maybe. It more reads like an EU perspective. EU peeps see themselves as one in the same with “Europe,” but Americans don’t see them that way, and neither do many Europeans. VAn Rumpuy appears to be complaining that the US prefers to deal with national governments directly. He won’t say that directly, because in the EU power freak autocrat mind, that should not possible to occur.
10
Richard S Courtney: # 15
Oops! I knew that I should just leave my first two sentences to stand or fall on their own merit.
But being gregarious, I could not resist hinting that these leaks are actually useful in a perverse sort of way.
People say things “in confidence” to other people, often spontaneously, to demonstrate a point. To find that these “confidences” then appear in official communications that a significant portion of the U.S. Administration can access (including it would appear, Junior Military Intelligence Officers, serving overseas), underscores the need for caution in any conversation that could remotely be construed as diplomacy, trade negotiations, or international business dealings, irrespective of whether those conversations are in an official meeting, or on the golf course, or at a fishing lodge.
To point to the “surprises” and “details” that I alluded to, would emphasise indiscretions already made. Suffice it for me to say, that the evidence provided by some of the leaked documents has been used to illustrate the need for discretion in the future.
10
One detail that surprised me was how boldly the developing countries demanded cash up front (“tangible assistance”) before they would vote. Previously I had imagined it, naively I suppose, as based on future promises.
10
Relevant climate Wikileaks links
WikiLeaks cables expose US use of espionage before the 2009 Copenhagen summit.
Hidden behind the save-the-world rhetoric of the global climate change negotiations lies the mucky realpolitik: money and threats buy political support; spying and cyberwarfare are used to seek out leverage.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-change
The US diplomatic cables reveal how the US seeks dirt on nations opposed to its approach to tackling global warming; how financial and other aid is used by countries to gain political backing; how distrust, broken promises and creative accounting dog negotiations; and how the US mounted a secret global diplomatic offensive to overwhelm opposition to the controversial “Copenhagen accord”,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/09/china-india-copenhagen-accord
the unofficial document that emerged from the ruins of the Copenhagen climate change summit in 2009.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/copenhagen
Negotiating a climate treaty is a high-stakes game, not just because of the danger warming poses to civilisation but also because re-engineering the global economy to a low-carbon model will see the flow of billions of dollars redirected.
Seeking negotiating chips, the US state department sent a secret cable on 31 July 2009 seeking human intelligence from UN diplomats across a range of issues, including climate change. The request originated with the CIA.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/02/wikileaks-cables-cia-united-nations
As well as countries’ negotiating positions for Copenhagen, diplomats were asked to provide evidence of UN environmental “treaty circumvention” and deals between nations.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/219058
But intelligence gathering was not just one way. On 19 June 2009, the state department sent a cable detailing a”spear phishing” attack on the office of the US climate change envoy, Todd Stern, while talks with China on emissions took place in Beijing.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/213121
Five people received emails, personalised to look as though they came from the National Journal.
http://nationaljournal.com/
An attached file contained malicious code that would give complete control of the recipient’s computer to a hacker. While the attack was unsuccessful, the department’s cyber threat analysis division noted: “It is probable intrusion attempts such as this will persist.”
The Beijing talks failed to lead to a global deal at Copenhagen. But the US, the world’s biggest historical polluter and long isolated as a climate pariah, had something to cling to. The Copenhagen accord, hammered out in the dying hours but not adopted into the UN process, offered to solve many of the US’s problems.
http://unfccc.int/home/items/5262.php
The accord turns the UN’s top-down, unanimous approach upside down, with each nation choosing palatable targets for greenhouse gas cuts. It presents a far easier way to bind in China and other rapidly growing countries than the UN process. But the accord cannot guarantee the global greenhouse gas cuts needed to avoid dangerous warming. Furthermore, it threatens to circumvent the UN’s negotiations on extending the Kyoto protocol, in which rich nations have binding obligations. Those objections have led many countries – particularly the poorest and most vulnerable – to vehemently oppose the accord.
Getting as many countries as possible to associate themselves with the accord strongly served US interests, by boosting the likelihood it would be officially adopted. A diplomatic offensive was launched. Diplomatic cables flew thick and fast between the end of Copenhagen in December 2009 and late February 2010, when the leaked cables end.
Some countries needed little persuading. The accord promised $30bn (£19bn) in aid for the poorest nations hit by global warming they had not caused. Within two weeks of Copenhagen, the Maldives foreign minister, Ahmed Shaheed, wrote to the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, expressing eagerness to back it.
By 23 February 2010, the Maldives’ ambassador-designate to the US, Abdul Ghafoor Mohamed, told the US deputy climate change envoy, Jonathan Pershing, his country wanted “tangible assistance”, saying other nations would then realise “the advantages to be gained by compliance” with the accord.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/251174
A diplomatic dance ensued. “Ghafoor referred to several projects costing approximately $50m (£30m). Pershing encouraged him to provide concrete examples and costs in order to increase the likelihood of bilateral assistance.”
The Maldives were unusual among developing countries in embracing the accord so wholeheartedly, but other small island nations were secretly seen as vulnerable to financial pressure. Any linking of the billions of dollars of aid to political support is extremely controversial – nations most threatened by climate change see the aid as a right, not a reward, and such a link as heretical. But on 11 February, Pershing met the EU climate action commissioner, Connie Hedegaard, in Brussels, where she told him, according to a cable, “the Aosis [Alliance of Small Island States] countries ‘could be our best allies’ given their need for financing”.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/249185
The pair were concerned at how the $30bn was to be raised and Hedegaard raised another toxic subject – whether the US aid would be all cash. She asked if the US would need to do any “creative accounting”, noting some countries such as Japan and the UK wanted loan guarantees, not grants alone, included, a tactic she opposed. Pershing said “donors have to balance the political need to provide real financing with the practical constraints of tight budgets”, reported the cable.
Along with finance, another treacherous issue in the global climate negotiations, currently continuing in Cancún, Mexico, is trust that countries will keep their word.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2010/dec/01/cancun-climate-change-summit-trust
Hedegaard asks why the US did not agree with China and India on what she saw as acceptable measures to police future emissions cuts. “The question is whether they will honour that language,” the cable quotes Pershing as saying.
Trust is in short supply on both sides of the developed-developing nation divide. On 2 February 2009, a cable from Addis Ababa reports a meeting between the US undersecretary of state Maria Otero and the Ethiopian prime minister, Meles Zenawi, who leads the African Union’s climate change negotiations.
The confidential cable records a blunt US threat to Zenawi: sign the accord or discussion ends now.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/246644
Zenawi responds that Ethiopia will support the accord, but has a concern of his own: that a personal assurance from Barack Obama on delivering the promised aid finance is not being honoured.
US determination to seek allies against its most powerful adversaries – the rising economic giants of Brazil, South Africa, India, China (Basic) – is set out in another cable from Brussels on 17 February reporting a meeting between the deputy national security adviser, Michael Froman, Hedegaard and other EU officials.
Froman said the EU needed to learn from Basic’s skill at impeding US and EU initiatives and playing them off against each in order “to better handle third country obstructionism and avoid future train wrecks on climate”.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/249182
Hedegaard is keen to reassure Froman of EU support, revealing a difference between public and private statements. “She hoped the US noted the EU was muting its criticism of the US, to be constructive,” the cable said. Hedegaard and Froman discuss the need to “neutralise, co-opt or marginalise unhelpful countries including Venezuela and Bolivia”, before Hedegaard again links financial aid to support for the accord, noting “the irony that the EU is a big donor to these countries”. Later, in April, the US cut aid to Bolivia and Ecuador, citing opposition to the accord.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/09/us-climate-aid
Any irony is clearly lost on the Bolivian president, Evo Morales, according to a 9 February cable from La Paz. The Danish ambassador to Bolivia, Morten Elkjaer, tells a US diplomat that, at the Copenhagen summit, “Danish prime minister Rasmussen spent an unpleasant 30 minutes with Morales, during which Morales thanked him for [$30m a year in] bilateral aid, but refused to engage on climate change issues.”
After the Copenhagen summit, further linking of finance and aid with political support appears. Dutch officials, initially rejecting US overtures to back the accord, make a startling statement on 25 January. According to a cable, the Dutch climate negotiator Sanne Kaasjager “has drafted messages for embassies in capitals receiving Dutch development assistance to solicit support [for the accord].
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/246026
This is an unprecedented move for the Dutch government, which traditionally recoils at any suggestion to use aid money as political leverage.” Later, however, Kaasjager rows back a little, saying: “The Netherlands would find it difficult to make association with the accord a condition to receive climate financing.”
Perhaps the most audacious appeal for funds revealed in the cables is from Saudi Arabia, the world’s second biggest oil producer and one of the 25 richest countries in the world. A secret cable sent on 12 February records a meeting between US embassy officials and lead climate change negotiator Mohammad al-Sabban. “The kingdom will need time to diversify its economy away from petroleum, [Sabban] said, noting a US commitment to help Saudi Arabia with its economic diversification efforts would ‘take the pressure off climate change negotiations’.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/248643
The Saudis did not like the accord, but were worried they had missed a trick. The assistant petroleum minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman told US officials that he had told his minister Ali al-Naimi that Saudi Arabia had “missed a real opportunity to submit ‘something clever’, like India or China, that was not legally binding but indicated some goodwill towards the process without compromising key economic interests”.
The cables obtained by WikiLeaks finish at the end of February 2010. Today, 116 countries have associated themselves with the accord.
http://unfccc.int/home/items/5262.php
Another 26 say they intend to associate. That total, of 140, is at the upper end of a 100-150 country target revealed by Pershing in his meeting with Hedegaard on 11 February.
The 140 nations represent almost 75% of the 193 countries that are parties to the UN climate change convention and, accord supporters like to point out, are responsible for well over 80% of current global greenhouse gas emissions.
At the mid-point of the major UN climate change negotiations in Cancún, Mexico, there have already been flare-ups over how funding for climate adaptation is delivered.
http://unfccc.int/2860.php
The biggest shock has been Japan’s announcement that it will not support an extension of the existing Kyoto climate treaty.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/dec/02/japan-stance-kyoto-protocol
That gives a huge boost to the accord. US diplomatic wheeling and dealing may, it seems, be bearing fruit.
[Mia Nony when there are this many links in a single post, the spam filters automatically trap the post.] ED
10
Obama sell out to China – Cancun climate deal?
The Obama administration is determined to cripple the American economy in the name of global warming – with or without a treaty.
The Chinese and American delegations are suddenly talking deals at the UN climate talks in Cancun.
China would drop objections to verification of its carbon emissions. The U.S. would send billions to fund warming projects and agree to use the EPA and other regulatory agencies to force Americans into carbon restrictions without sending a treaty to the Senate. India appears ready to “toe the Chinese line” and get on board.
These carbon restrictions will devastate the US economic recovery and kill jobs. None of this will alter the climate in any meaningful way.
Delegation’s are in the thick of the UN warming conference right now, in the right place at the right time. Lord Christopher Monckton joined the CFACT (Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow) delegation yesterday and NASA satellite expert Dr. Roy Spencer is en route.
They are said to be ramping up efforts to focus attention on these developments like a laser, informing UN delegates, establishing a dialogue, debunking the hype and making sure a realistic assessment of climate policy is heard through the media.
Obama’s and the U.N.’s actions are dangerous. The consequences will be devastating.
10
The U.S. and China “would like to emerge from Cancun with a deal.”
–Su Wei, Chinese chief negotiator
“We are committed to achieving a successful outcome here in Cancun . . . the ultimate objective that we are seeking is to combat the threat of climate change . . . . it was quite clear that we were converging.”
–Dr. Jonathan Pershing, U.S. chief negotiator
10
Jannes Kleintje@11
RE: Mt Egmont eroding. Mt Egmont is well and truly overdue to erupt these days (as is well, much of New Zealand). All that eroded surface will be quickly replaced. In the Taranaki districts case this will probably come in the form of massive lahars.
So the whole idea that Mt Egmont is being threatened by erosion is absolute rubbish. The whole province is threatened by Mt Egmont. Of course the extremely fertile volcanic soil is a good reason to stay for some.
As for the locals hearing the rocks moving down the river, I can confirm this was the case 30 years ago and before. I can also confirm that Egmont has allways had intense storms up there – I think from memory over 200 climbers have died on that mountain -often by being caught out in the rapid local weather changes.
It really sounds like that report was written by some JAFA desk jockey.
10
Off Topic;
Does everybody else remember the hammering Defreitas,McLlean and Carter took over their paper on the southern oscillation, http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml
Well over at climate conversation, http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/12/cooling-forecast-comes-true/ we have the following.
This makes for an informative read.
10
It appears that the US govt. has, once again decided that the US constitution is a pesky thing that needs to be disregarded when convenient(for the govt. that is).
Govt. contractors and their employes are being threatened by loss of contracts and/or employment if they access the wikileaks info from company or PERSONAL computers.
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_16762048
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/12/3/925294/-The-Wikileaks-Scare-and-the-return-of-McCarthyism
10
SOrt of off thread – check out the flow diagram at
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/04/agw-defender-flowchart/
10
UAH down to .38C for November.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/
10
so we are currently .38C above our 1979 temp when satellites began.
That means we are warming at .1C per decade which COULD result in a 1C rise in the 21st Century. SoWhat!
10
But wait… the cables are all being taken out of context!
Isn’t that the SOB line they will be pushing next? Maybe they could hire the folks at RC to help them with the smoke and mirrors… they have been doing it for years and years and have heaps of practice.
10
janama @ 30
December 5th, 2010
“so we are currently .38C above our 1979 temp when satellites began.
That means we are warming at .1C per decade which COULD result in a 1C rise in the 21st Century…”
Guess that depends on the factor(s) causing that 0.38C increase since 1979. If it was anthropogenic CO2 caused, only, expect the increase to be less in the next 31 years (given the feedbacks are neutral to negative). If it was part or wholly the result of natural climate variation your guess is as good as the best climatologist… or astrologer available.
10
David, UK @4
Those socialist commentators you speak of are more commonly known as ‘useful idiots’.
Its always nice to have wikileaks confirm what I’ve been saying for a while now to my friends.
Now who’s the crazy one huh?
10
Remember a voice of rationality and sanity out of Copenhagen? His name was Al-Sabban. He gave me hope that there was a real dialogue occuring:
” Minister Al-Naimi has consistently been rational and practical in talking with western delegations about climate change, noting that Saudi Arabia had to address its development concerns, but conceding that the world needs to work together to address climate change. These reassuring statements stand in sharp contrast to Al-Sabban’s public comments, such as questioning the science behind climate change just before Copenhagen, and his often obstructionist behavior, as reported by a number of Embassies in Riyadh, during working-level negotiations. Senior Ministry of Petroleum officials have reassured us after each of Al-Sabban’s public outbursts over the last six months that he has been “tamed” and brought back onto the reservation. The frequency and number of times that Al-Sabban steps out of line, and the apparent lack of any sanction, raises questions about the real Saudi position on climate change.”
10
This is sort of on the topic.
The great lies of history. Ref: Goebells, Stalin, (substitute the religion of your choice) is evil, Czars who know what is best for the peasants,… seem to result in some serious conflict when the BS is exposed. In short, zealotry breeds war. I perceive some trouble for a few western democracies, because the indications are that there are many (with power) who will not give up the AGW faith. regardless of the facts. Money, prestige and power are now at stake.
10
People are dying from the governments policies have changed and the U.K. and Europe are unprepared for the snow and cold weather. Bad advice and bad science from the climate experts are directly to blame for it! Paid for by your local governmented funded research.
10
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
The leaks show politicians behaving badly, and there is nothing new about that. This behaviour would exist, whether we are facing dangerous levels of warming or not. It does not bolster the d*%&@#st faith one bit.
However it does indicate, rather sadly, that if united action were necessary, and it was not in the interests of some nations, then it probably wouldn’t happen. A sort of “bugger my neighbour” policy.
BTW, some of you are [snip], and some are not. Feel free to categorise yourselves.
now now John, lets not have any of that. we enjoy your company here and wish you to remain. mod
10
Wikileaks causes me some discomfort. On one hand I find it reprehensible that data security is so lax, on the other hand it is more reprehensible that my
governmentpoliticians are so despicable.I am also marveling at how the conservative talkers are demonizing the leaker. It is almost like this leak was strategically planned for the ultimate purpose of “silencing” the leak system before something really foul was leaked.
10
The climate science was not irrelevant. It was used to justify the renewable energy scam that has provided far more gravy than research grants ecer could, or ever will.
The battle moved into the renewable energy field some time ago, and it also moved into the “planning for catastrophe” scam do that municipal contracts could be extended to “environmentally friendly” companies.
Anyone who is concerned about global warming charade and the costs involved should spend some time looking at wind energy, solar energy and pointless preparation for disaster in their towns and villages in Ontario Canada these industries are spending hundreds of billions of dollars on “eco-projects”.
10
John Brookes:
December 5th, 2010 at 11:47 pm
Gee wiz, John, aren’t you trolls required to take continuing education classes to retain your troll certification?
You enjoy John’s company? Yah, and I wish it really were a Baby Ruth candy bar floating in the pool! Instead, it is John.
10
Lots of implications in this I suppose. But the most surprising thing to me is how many are so surprised that this kind of thing goes on. It goes on constantly. It’s the reality of international politics and national defense. This is just one with a high enough damage value against the Obama administration that the incentive to blow the whistle was irresistible.
Good to have it out in the open. But let’s remember something here. Every government is looking out for its interests all the time. Those interests are not always the good interest of the governed. And the rules of engagement just don’t exist. Anyone watching Obama operate should have realized this by now. The man is ruthless.
We have already known that the science has had absolutely nothing to do with any of it. So pure and simple it’s political power.
I’m amused by attempts to put the cat back in the bag. Prohibit access all you want but that won’t stop it. And by the knee-jerk reaction you just admit how much you’re embarrassed and damaged by the leaks. Forbidden fruit is all the more attractive because it’s forbidden.
Mark D., I hate to say it but security isn’t as good or as easy you might think. On a Sunday afternoon back in 1964 I sat in a standing room only railroad car returning home from Boston and I listened to a couple of soldiers discussing classified information in a loud voice for about five minutes. I couldn’t see them or get to them and because they were so much closer to the exit than I was they got out before I could identify them. If I had been able to identify them they would have been eligible for court-martial. It only takes one blabbermouth to foil all the security measures in the world. The problem is that to make anything work too many people have to know about it.
10
[…] […]
10
[…] by Joanne Nova […]
10
Mark D @40
I’ve also wondered if there is a ‘conspiracy’ going on regarding the leaks. Like I hope this doesn’t sound nuts but it could be used as an excuse to control our internet (false flag operation).
10
Fortunately for you non-Americans, you can now see the incompetence, graft, corruption and greed that pervades this administration. You will not see that reported in any US press as they do not know how to report bad news about the administration (journalistic incompetence). But what the US press cannot or (probably more true) WILL not report, apparently Assange has no problems reporting.
At this rate, we all best start learning Chinese as this president will surely make us their “57th” state before he leaves office.
10
John Smith @46
I hadn’t thought of the “internet control” idea but your thought is worth consideration (not nuts). We should “stay tuned” and watch this develop.
PS the word conspiracy seems to have a rather wide meaning to folks here at Jo Nova and around the world. I propose we use the following “code”:
***conspiracy = low level water cooler plot < 5 people involved. ***Conspiracy = medium level local and state level plot <100 people involved. ***CONSPIRACY = national and international plot <1000 people involved. ***grand CONSPIRACY = multinational, one world government, Strong, Soros, Club of Rome etc. >1000 people involved.
***GRAND CONSPIRACY = All the above, involves everyone except me and that has me insolvent, broke or dead (prematurely)
By using the above code we should be able to keep our personal paranoia from confusing the other bloggers! 🙂
10
Hey guys, it’s already going on. They’re calling it, “Net Neutrality.”
I know he’s not PC to some, but check out theblaze.com.
10
We want Climate Change Advocate Capture and Storage NOT a carbon intensity ceiling!
Our completely out of touch South Australian Premier, Mike Rann spent 24 hours over the weekend stranded at an English airport.
He and his entourage had been in London meeting with defence industry executives and they were due to leave for a climate conference in Cancun, Mexico Saturday night Adelaide time.
But his British Airways jet was grounded at Gatwick Airport due to a mechanical fault. (Lack of snow ploughs)
Mr Rann told ABC radio there was a technical fault with some of the parts on the plane. (Wheels stuck in ice)
“The good thing is we won’t miss any of the conference,” he said.
Well too bad for us that he made it to the conference and announced that South Australia is getting a “carbon intensity ceiling”. Higher electricity bills to you and me.
Having no opinions of his own, Premier Rann said the Government had been guided in its deliberations on the carbon intensity ceiling by expert advice received from the engineering services company, WorleyParsons.
10
[…] by Joanne Nova […]
10
Small and distant Norfolk Island, an Australian protectorate, located to the east of the Barrier Reef, and to the north-west of New Zealand is quietly rising to prominence in political circles, for it is now the testing ground for the worldwide implementation of the monitoring and restriction on the size of individuals’ carbon footprints.
First, a quick background to the media coverage:
“Southern Cross University is set to lead a project testing the world’s first Personal Carbon Trading program conducted in a ‘closed system’ island environment on Norfolk Island commencing early next year.”
This announcement was made in a Media Release from Australia’s Southern Cross University on 27th October 2010.
http://www.scu.edu.au/news/media.php?action=show_item&print=on&item_id=1641
In Australia the Sydney Morning Herald published a story on the subject suggests that “If successful, it could improve the health of the residents as well as reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”
The London Daily Telegraph also wrote the story with “During the trial, residents will use the card when they pay for petrol and power. Those who use fewer units by walking or cycling instead of driving or using less electricity at home, will be able to exchange any remaining credit at the end of the year for cash.”
The Australian Newspaper said; “it appears likely Norfolk Islanders, who pay no income tax and only a 12 per cent local GST, (Goods & Services Tax) will have to pay some Australian tax in exchange for access to a range of benefits such as family allowances, dole payments and Medicare. The federal government is expected to organise an immediate infusion of funds”.
So my friends, the story is now clear, the Norfolk Island residents “faced with an empty treasury, a collapsing tourism trade and mounting government debts” have sold their Birthright of Freedom in exchange for Welfare, Health Care and never-ending Taxes to be levied against them.
Norfolk is a small Pacific island with an independent Government but is a Protectorate of Australia. Who is the man who will oversee this “wonderful” plan? He is Professor Garry Egger of Southern Cross University, who has declared that;
Chronic disease is linked to climate change, Professor says – 18/03/20
http://www.scu.edu.au/news/media.php?item_id=1269&action=show_item&type=M
Is this man, a Professor of Lifestyle Medicine and Applied Health Promotion, a man of Science or a Court Jester?
Egger is being paid $390,000 for the three year “study”.
Thirty thousand Tourists a year (almost 100,000 from around the world) will be included in the Scam, er, Scheme and this is especially convenient. The Tourists involved – probably seeing their own Carbon Credit Card as a kind of Holiday Novelty may think “these Islanders are really Environmentally Conscientious ” – and off they go, back to their homes, and Acceptance will go with them – like the Ripples on a Pond.
According to Egger, it is intended to be introduced in Australia then the UK – what’s next? The European Union? North America? China? He said it was intended to go Global.
His jovial assertion that it will be “Fun” is especially ominous.
Small communities are often used to launch Products or Concepts – consider them to be Free Range Focus Groups – and as with all such groups, objections and dissatisfaction are duly noted (in this case by Egger), usually NOT to improve the product/concept, but to better fashion the Propaganda required to achieve maximum Market Acceptance. The people of Norfolk are ripe for the taking. With their Treasury virtually empty, living in a pristine environment, protective of their Island, wishing to be Environmentally “Responsible” and persuaded that their participation is “for the greater good” of the Planet, they will “give it a try” – no harm in it is there?
If this “harmless, fun holiday novelty” is NOT intended to ultimately become Compulsory (the only way it can achieve its Purpose) then why is its architect, the Professor of Lifestyle, flying halfway round the world to present his Concept to an International audience of Government Representatives, Climate Change activists and Journalists at Cancun Mexico?
However, this is only the beginning. In the second year THE HEALTH CARE COSTS of FOOD will be included. There are many facets of this carefully crafted and glittering Carbon Gem.
How can such Health Care Costs be measured?
It’s NOT about the fat/sugar/salt content of food. It’s about the Health Care Costs of the chronic diseases caused by fat/sugar/salt content of food and rising levels of Diabetes, Hypertension, High Cholesterol and Obesity. As well as the costs of Medical and Hospital Care, does it include ongoing and expensive Medications from the Pharmaceutical Industry?
Will Consumers who DON’T suffer from those Chronic Diseases, when buying a certain type of food, be subsidizing the Health Care Costs of the people who DO suffer from them but don’t eat that type of food?
Will even healthy, conscientious people be forced to indirectly pay the high costs of Care and Treatment for those who suffer chronic disease through either poor choices or simple misfortune? This is in addition to ordinary taxes which support our Medical Systems.
These are very vexing Questions. They need to be asked AND they indeed DEMAND to be answered.
This Scheme is designed so that the Government will decide an Allocation of Carbon Use for each person.
Each Individual’s Use will be tracked through the Carbon Credit Card. If a person exceeds his Permitted Allocation, he will be forced to pay for more. If he cannot afford to do so, he will not be permitted to buy a bus or an airline ticket, put gasoline in his car or buy electricity. Those who use less will be encouraged to “sell” their Allocation, Carbon Credits, to the wealthy.
The poor will become even more constricted by their circumstances.
The wealthy, who can afford to buy Government “permission”, will continue to live their extravagant lifestyles. The Government will determine which kinds of food you will be permitted to eat without penalty.
The Government will decide the SIZE of every Individual’s Carbon Footprint. The Government will decide what size Shoe will fit that footprint. The Government will ultimately give every Individual Carbon Footprint an annual Government Pedicure.
“Over time the number of carbon units handed out on the cards will go down, forcing individuals to work harder to maintain a low-carbon lifestyle.”
The ultimate design of this Scheme is very clear in the original Media Release. Is this the future any Citizens of any Nation want to see for themselves and their children? I sincerely trust that it is not.
http://ourmaninsichuan.wordpress.com/2010/11/14/the-cancun-shuffle-norfolk-island-personal-carbon-credit-card-scheme/
10
John Smith @46
You don’t sound ‘nuts’ to me, or to a lot of others.
http://www.naturalnews.com/030647_Wikileaks_net_neutrality.html
10
Tim @ 53
It’s nice to know that I’m not crazy for suggesting that the leaks could be used as an excuse to remove internet freedom altogether at least in America. I have very good reasons to fear that the whole world could lose internet free speech altogether if we’re not careful.
The global elites are really pissed that their crimes are being exposed and this could be their best shot at doing so.
Fred Firth @50
The same Premier who advocated a carbon limit for SA?
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/sa-to-set-carbon-emissions-limit-20101206-18lps.html
10
[…] If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting! by Joanne Nova […]
10