Tag Archives: UN

The climate screw-job continues


The UN's new logo?


Cap & trade is basically DOA now that the Chicago Climate Exchange has ceased operations, it’s also dead in Congress and even Obama has declared it dead. Climate talks in Copenhagen basically got no where fast and it’s predicted the upcoming talks in Cancun won’t be any better.

Yet, the diehard boneheads at the United Nations continue to scheme on way to screw rich nations out of every penny they can get, based upon the fraud of non-existent anthropogenic global warming. Per the Guardian we get this article titled “Climate finance plan could break talks inertiaOur report showing how $100bn a year can be raised for climate adaptation will help make progress towards agreement at Cancún.”

Financial support for developing countries will play a vital role in any integrated action and thus the fresh proposals in the new report by the high-level advisory group on climate change financing, which was commissioned by the United Nations secretary-general in February, can help make progress towards agreement in the United Nations conference in Cancún, Mexico, which starts later this month.

So basically we’re back to they’re going to find some crap excuse to get money out of rich countries and give it to poor countries.

The group’s report concluded that the goal of raising $100bn a year for developing countries is feasible if the political will is there. And it identified a coherent set of mutually reinforcing policies.

Yes, a mere $100 billion a year out of your wallet folks. It’s a scam to  prevent a scam. In a nutshell, they want to tax everything that moves and/or creates carbon emissions.  Power plants, air transport, shipping, you name it, they want to tax it.

So who created this report? Read the list. Note our old buddy George Soros is in on it and notice the banks are in on it. Also, notice all the poor countries that would benefit by getting free money are in on it.

Membership, High-Level Advisory Group of the UN Secretary-General on Climate Change Financing

Heads of State and Government

  • Meles Zenawi, Prime Minister of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (Co-Chair)
  • Jens Stoltenberg, Prime Minister of Norway (Co-Chair)
  • Bharrat Jagdeo, President of the Republic of Guyana

Other members: (in alphabetical order)

  • Ambassador Pedro Luiz Carneiro de Mendonça, Under-Secretary General for Economic and Technological Affairs, Ministry of External Relations, Federal Republic of Brazil
  • Soumaïla Cissé, President, Commission of the West African Monetary Union
  • Ernesto Cordero Arroyo, Minister of Finance, Mexico
  • Chris Huhne, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, United Kingdom
  • Sri Mulyani Indrawati, Managing Director, World Bank Group
  • Donald Kaberuka, President, African Development Bank
  • Caio Koch-Weser, Vice-Chairman, Deutsche Bank Group
  • Christine Lagarde, Minister of the Economy, Industry and Employment, France
  • Trevor Manuel, Minister in the Presidency for National Planning, Republic of South Africa
  • Bob McMullan, Member of Parliament and Parliamentary Secretary for International Development Assistance, Australia
  • Mutsuyoshi Nishimura, Special Advisor to the Cabinet Office, Japan
  • Supachai Panitchpakdi, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade & Development (UNCTAD)
  • Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Minister for Finance, Republic of Singapore
  • Lawrence H. Summers, Director of the National Economic Council and Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, United States of America
  • Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission, Republic of India
  • George Soros, Chairman, Soros Fund Management
  • Nicholas Stern, Professor of Economics and Government, London School of Economics
  • Zhu Guangyao, Vice-Minister, Ministry of Finance, People’s Republic of China

Read the article. My take on it is that the real reason behind this scam is money and control. Global warming is just a lame excuse to milk wealthy countries. The élite libtards want to control everyone on the globe. They want the UN to be your friendly global dictator. If you are a history student you will see the obvious similarities between the Nazis, Lenin, Stalin, Chairman Mao, and a long list of dictators. Create a crisis or a problem then use it like a tool to get the populace over to your side to save the country or save the world.

More CO2 Insanity.

Source: The Guardian

Comments Off on The climate screw-job continues

Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Government, Politics, United Nations

IAC REPORT ON IPCC: Finally skeptics exonerated

Finally we get a report from the UN IAC (Inter Academy Council) regarding their investigation of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Here’s my take on it.

While this seems a possible case of the proverbial fox guarding the hen-house, in my opinion the  IAC appears to be VERY AWARE of the shenanigans surrounding the IPCC 4th Assessment Report (AR4) that was published in 2007, and moreover, what’s been going on since. There have been many questions about this report and the data surrounding it (Climategate for example), with little or no response other than obfuscation, stonewalling or just plain old-fashioned BS. It seems this is a good report that addresses the problems.

By their own response the IAC appears to me to exonerate the “skeptics” who have questioned how they came to their conclusions by citing errors the IPCC made regarding things such as the Himalayan glaciers melting by 2035, use of non-peer reviewed items, use of things such as magazine articles, the peer-review process, estimates of probability and many other items. This is tantamount to an admission that the IPCC AR4 is riddled with errors, omissions, possibly even fraud, and that the people who have been questioning what has been going on at the IPCC have been correct in their assessments of “unprecedented” problems with the report and the people responsible for it.

I am glad to see that they have made what appear to be some solid recommendations about how future IPCC reports will be handled, which hopefully won’t only provide a more realistic report, but will have ways for non-participants to be able to review the old who-what-where-when-and why based upon what’s contained in the report without having to ask a lot of questions with no answers received. In other words the next report should contain just about everything anyone would want to know about the data, the process, the scientist involved, how decisions were made, etc.

It also appears based upon their recommendation to elect an Executive Director and limit his or her term that they’re less than happy with Rajendra Pachauri who throughout this process seems to have, to be polite, done an lees than stellar job.  They also want people in charge in between reports so there can be valid responses to valid questions after the next report is issued.

If this document isn’t ignored it will be a good thing.  But, there’s always the possibility that we’ll end up with it only producing new ways for some of the participants to provide another faux report with faux information, provided by faux science in an effort to keep the pressure on that anthropogenic global warming is real. That remains to be seen.

Per their Executive Summary found here (PDF), we get the following recommendations.

  • Recommendation: The IPCC should establish an Executive Committee to act on its behalf between Plenary sessions. The membership of the Committee should include the IPCC Chair, the Working Group Co-chairs, the senior member of the Secretariat, and 3 independent members, including some from outside of the climate community. Members would be elected by the Plenary and serve until their successors are in place.
  • Recommendation: The IPCC should elect an Executive Director to lead the Secretariat and handle day-to-day operations of the organization. The term of this senior scientist should be limited to the timeframe of one assessment.
  • Recommendation: The IPCC should adopt a more targeted and effective process for responding to reviewer comments. In such a process, Review Editors would prepare a written summary of the most significant issues raised by reviewers shortly after review comments have been received. Authors would be required to provide detailed written responses to the most significant review issues identified by the Review Editors, abbreviated responses to all non-editorial comments, and no written responses to editorial comments.
  • Recommendation: All Working Groups should use the qualitative level-of-understanding scale in their Summary for Policy Makers and Technical Summary, as suggested in IPCC’s uncertainty guidance for the Fourth Assessment Report. This scale may be supplemented by a quantitative probability scale, if appropriate.
  • Recommendation: Quantitative probabilities (as in the likelihood scale) should be used to describe the probability of well-defined outcomes only when there is sufficient evidence. Authors should indicate the basis for assigning a probability to an outcome or event (e.g., based on measurement, expert judgment, and/or model runs).
  • Recommendation: The IPCC should complete and implement a communications strategy that emphasizes transparency, rapid and thoughtful responses, and relevance to stakeholders, and which includes guidelines about who can speak on behalf of IPCC and how to represent the organization appropriately.

From Fox News we get quotes from Harold Shapiro, Chair of the IAC investigation:

It appears that editors “didn’t follow through carefully enough on what review editors commented,” said Shapiro.

“We found in the summary for policymakers that there were two kinds of errors that came up — one is the kind where they place high confidence in something where there is very little evidence. The other is the kind where you make a statement … with no substantive value, in our judgment.”

And quotes from Don Easterbrook, an emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University:

“The IPCC report is filled with statements of ‘90% certainty’ without even saying 90% of what or providing any basis for such statements. Yet those pronouncements of certainty were used over and over as though that had been scientifically proven somehow,” he told FoxNews.com.

It seems Pachauri doesn’t get the message:

“The IPCC has yet to review the IAC’s findings, so I am not able to comment on its findings,” said longstanding chair Rajendra Pachauri in a press conference following the presentation. But he did note that none of the seven reviews of the IPCC to date had found flaws in the U.N. group.

Hopefully he will get it, in the end (pun intended).

The main report found here (PDF), will provide you with more details about the IPCC’s failures and what direction the IAC wants them to go in, which seems to be in the direction of real science, and that’s a good thing.

Perhaps the CO2 Insanity is beginning to subside.

Source: IAC

Source: Fox News

Comments Off on IAC REPORT ON IPCC: Finally skeptics exonerated

Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Government, IAC, IPCC, United Nations

Galápagos Islands not endangered?

I guess UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee must be totally unaware of the IPCC, global warming, sea-level rise, etc., because per this article at the BBC they have removed the Galápagos Islands from their endangered list.

If you believe the IPCC reports and all the drama queens on the internet who are staining their undies about global warming, then the Galápagos Islands should still be on the endangered list because we’re going to have “unprecedented” warmth and “robust” sea-level rise due to melting glaciers, CO2, earthquakes, Coca Cola, Toyota Prius’s and anything and everything else that causes or is caused by anthropogenic global warming.

I just thought I’d post about this to show you that the brain trust one side of the UN Building must be totally clueless about what the brain trust is doing on in the other side of the building.

Perhaps the recent heat-wave on the East Coast drove them bonkers?

Source: BBC

Comments Off on Galápagos Islands not endangered?

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Science, Truth Stranger than Fiction

WHO Claim is "Baloney!"

Uh oh!  First the IPPC and their glaciers melting by 2035 “mistake” (not to mention numerous other ones in their ‘report’), we now have problems with a World Health Organization (WHO) claim that they’re “on course to halve proportion of people without access to water.”  It’s not CO2 Insanity, but it’s brought by some of the same people (UN) who brought you that.  To to further show you how “credible” the UN and WHO are, please read on.  From this article in The Guardian.

Hundreds of millions of people that the UN declares have gained access to safe water and sanitation are still struggling with polluted supplies and raw sewage, a leading expert has told the Guardian.

Say what?  The UN says they have safe water but it’s still polluted?  Sounds like those melting glaciers and 15-20 foot sea-level rise. Here’s what the report notes.

In its latest report on the progress of the UN Millennium Development Goal to halve the proportion of people lacking access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation, the World Health Organisation said that since 1990 1.3 billion people had gained access to improved drinking water and 500 million better sanitation. The world was on course to “meet or exceed” the water target, it said, but was likely to miss the sanitation goal by nearly 1 billion people.

I can see this one coming, evidently the people who write reports at the UN are clueless again.

However, Prof Asit Biswas, who has advised national governments, six UN agencies and Nato, said official figures showing that many cities and countries had met their targets were “baloney”, and predicted that by the UN deadline of 2015 more people in the world would suffer from these problems than when the goals were first adopted.

Biswas, president of the Third World Centre for Water Management, spoke to the Guardian ahead of a speech tomorrow in which he will tell water industry leaders that inadequate improvements to drinking water and sewage are hiding the true scale of the problem and storing up environmental problems for future generations.

Sounds lolike Bisawas has the bona fides to make his claims.  Here’s what he’s talking about.

If somebody has a well in a town or village in the developing world and we put concrete around the well – nothing else – it becomes an ‘improved source of water’; the quality is the same but you have ‘improved’ the physical structure, which has no impact,” said Biswas. “They are not only underestimating the problem, they are giving the impression the problem is being solved. What I’m trying to say is that’s a bunch of baloney.”

Seems the UN’s idea of improved water quality is to make the well pretty and forget about actually doing something to make it clean.  You’re still drinking the same crap (perhaps literally).

Seems water scarcity isn’t the problem.

Biswas will also tell the Global Water Intelligence conference in Paris that water problems are caused not by physical scarcity of supplies but by poor management, including corruption, interference by politicians and inexperience.

“These are real-life problems, but are we talking about them in the water profession? No. We talk about water scarcity,” the professor said. “With the water we have, and the money we have, we can manage it better.”

Sounds like the UN.  Billions get pumped in, disappear off the face of the Earth, then nothing gets done, then they want more money.  Sounds like they need UNANON to get them unhooked from money addiction and BSANON to get them unhooked from “baloney” addiction. I can easily imagine some “construction company” in a 3rd world country getting a $100,000 to improve a well and spending $100 on cement and labor to make it look pretty and then pocketing the remaining $99,900.

“I’m asking them which planet they are on,” he said.

I’d offer the suggestion that we rename the planet Earth to the planet “Bal0ney.” Seems like we have an endless supply of “baloney” or “bullshit” or “lies” coming out of the UN not to mention all of the other “baloney” we talk about on here that has to to with global warming.

Here’s more proof right from the same horses mouth (UN-WHO) that lied about being half-way to having clean water for everyone.

His comments follow another report last week from the WHO and Unicef, which claimed aid for water and sanitation improvements was falling and that only 42% of money donated to the issue went to where it was needed most.

Frankly, based on the “baloney” level at the UN,  I’d be surprised if it was even 42%.

Barbara Frost, chief executive of the UK-based global charity WaterAid, said: “Here is a global catastrophe which kills more children than HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis combined and which is holding back all development efforts including health and education.”

From my point of view AGW is “baloney” and here sits a real problem that could be solved if all the money they waste on AGW were spent on a real clean water program.  Then you’d get something for your money besides “baloney.”

Source:  The Guardian.co.uk

Comments Off on WHO Claim is "Baloney!"

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Financial, Science

Bonn is a Bust, or, UN Process Like a Dead Battery

Seems the UN just can’t hack it. COP 15 was a dud.  Now their try at a jumpstart in Bonn is turning into the equivalent of an automotive dead battery. Jumper cables seem to be useless.

More than 170 UN countries gathered in Bonn this weekend for the first meeting on climate change since talks ended in chaos in Copenhagen at the end of last year.

Chaos? More like a total dud.

Yvo de Boer, the head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which is leading the talks, said small progress was made on technical issues.

Sounds more like no progress was made on anything, which is a good thing. If they ever do agree it will take you tax dollars and send them to places in 3rd world countries where the money will magically disappear into someone’s Swiss bank account.

He said officials will meet at least three more times before a final meeting of ministers in Cancun, Mexico at the end of the year where it is hoped the world will finally reach an agreement on the best way to stop catastrophic warming.

Reminds me of an infertile couple trying to get pregnant again and again and again.

They just can’t get it together.  Rich and poor countries can’t agree, rich countries won’t budge until big countries like China agree to cut emissions.  Whine…whine..whine.

Sounds like global whining at its best.  I hope they keep failing, the UN should stand for “Useless Nations”, which is about what it is.

More people affected by CO2 Insanity. I do wonder how much CO2 they all put into the air flying around all over the globe again.  But that doesn’t apply to the élite, only us peons.

Source:  Telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off on Bonn is a Bust, or, UN Process Like a Dead Battery

Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Politics

Pachauri: What? Me worry?

Per The Hindustan Times in this article Pachauri rules out stepping down even if UN panel finds fault…

Stating that the IPCC will make efforts to ensure that its fifth assessment report carries no errors, its chairman R K Pachauri has ruled out stepping down even if the UN-constituted review committee finds faults in the procedures followed by the climate panel.

Sounds like a case of “I have a fat head” and “I am perfect” rolled into one asshole.

To a poser on whether it was a system failure, he maintained it was more of a “procedural failure” and said, “We will do everything humanly possible to ensure that the error in the fourth report is not there in the fifth report.”

“Absolutely”, was his reply to a question on whether one single failure was being ‘taken out of proportion’.

“Absolutely. One error does not dilute the findings of the IPCC that the glaciers are melting,” he said.

One single failure? One error? That’s all? What’s this guy smoking?  Here’s a site with 54 errors form the 4th IPCC Report!  One error?  Also, let us not forget his ties to TATA, who got £2 Billion for closing the last steel making plant in the UK.

This guy needs to go, he has no credibility, except in his own delusional mind.

Source: Hindustan Times

Comments Off on Pachauri: What? Me worry?

Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Financial, Politics

Beef! It's what's for dinner!

beeffordinner_f2You no longer have to switch to a diet of tofu and seaweed to save the environment from that nasty old CO2 and methane.  The Daily Mail Online reports in this article that…

Calls to save the planet by eating less meat are based on an exaggerated UN report linking livestock to global warming, according to an analysis of the study.

Sounds like the UN got it wrong again…..hmmmm….big surprise…

Dr Mitloehner says meat and milk production generates less greenhouse gas than most environmentalists claim – and highlights the source of confusion as a report from the UN.

The good Doctor points this out…

Dr Mitloehner, of the University of California, says the misleading claims emanate from a 2006 UN report which said livestock was ‘responsible for 18 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions’. ‘This is a higher share than transport,’ it added.

The figure was picked up and recycled by ‘eat less meat’ campaigners all over the world. But according to Dr Mitloehner the claim is inaccurate and ‘unscientific’ because the numbers for livestock were calculated differently from the transport figures, resulting in what he describes as an ‘apples-and- oranges analogy that truly confused the issue’.

Yes the cows do fart….but it ain’t THAT bad (unless you happen to be behind one when it cuts loose!)

He says there is no doubt that livestock are major producers of methane – a potent greenhouse gas.  But he argues that the focus of tackling climate change should be on ‘smarter farming’, not less farming.

The UN should claim a “mulligan” on their report and start anew.  Hmmmm should I go to In and Out?  Or, Burger King?

Source:  The Daily Mail Online

Comments Off on Beef! It's what's for dinner!

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Editor, Science