Historic pact to slow global warming is celebrated in Paris

[rooster59]

Historic pact to slow global warming is celebrated in Paris

KARL RITTER, Associated Press
SETH BORENSTEIN, Associated Press
SYLVIE CORBET, Associated Press


LE BOURGET, France (AP) — Nearly 200 nations adopted the first global pact to fight climate change on Saturday, calling on the world to collectively cut and then eliminate greenhouse gas pollution but imposing no sanctions on countries that don't.

The "Paris agreement" aims to keep global temperatures from rising another degree Celsius (1.8 Fahrenheit) between now and 2100, a key demand of poor countries ravaged by rising sea levels and other effects of climate change.

Loud applause erupted in the conference hall after French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius gaveled the agreement. Some delegates wept, others embraced.

"It's a victory for all of the planet and for future generations," U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said, adding that the pact will "prevent the worst most devastating consequences of climate change from ever happening."

Brazilian Environment Minister Izabella Teixeira added: "Today, we've proven that it's possible for every country to come together, hand in hand, to do its part to fight climate change."

In the pact, the countries pledge to limit the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by human activity to the levels that trees, soil and oceans can absorb naturally, beginning at some point between 2050 and 2100.

In practical terms, achieving that goal means the world would have to stop emitting greenhouse gases — most of which come from the burning of oil, coal and gas for energy — altogether in the next half-century, scientists said. That's because the less we pollute, the less pollution nature absorbs.

Achieving such a reduction in emissions would involve a complete transformation of how people get energy, and many activists worry that despite the pledges, countries are not ready to make such profound, costly changes.

The deal now needs to be ratified by individual governments — at least 55 countries representing at least 55 percent of global emissions — before taking effect. It is the first pact to ask all countries to join the fight against global warming, representing a sea change in U.N. talks that previously required only wealthy nations to reduce their emissions.

"History will remember this day," U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said. "The Paris agreement on climate change is a monumental success for the planet and its people."

Speaking from Washington, President Barack Obama said the climate agreement offers "the best chance to save the one planet we have."

The deal commits countries to keeping the rise in global temperatures by the year 2100 compared with pre-industrial times "well below" 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), and says they will "endeavor to limit" them even more, to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The world has already warmed by about 1 degree Celsius since pre-industrial times.

Ben Strauss, a sea level researcher at Climate Central, said limiting warming to 1.5 degrees instead of 2 degrees could potentially cut in half the projected 280 million people whose houses will eventually be submerged by rising seas.

More than 180 countries have ready presented plans to limit greenhouse gas emissions— a breakthrough in itself after years of stalemate. But those pledges are not enough to achieve the goals in the accord, meaning countries will need to cut much more to meet the goal.

"We've agreed to what we ought to be doing, but no one yet has agreed to go do it," said Dennis Clare, a negotiator for the Federated States of Micronesia. "It's a whole lot of pomp, given the circumstances."

The agreement sets a goal of getting global greenhouse gas emissions to start falling "as soon as possible"; they have been generally rising since the industrial revolution.

It says wealthy nations should continue to provide financial support for poor nations to cope with climate change and encourages other countries to pitch in on a voluntary basis. That reflects Western attempts to expand the donor base to include advanced developing countries such as China.

In a victory for small island nations, the agreement includes a section highlighting the losses they expect to incur from climate-related disasters that it's too late to adapt to. However, a footnote specifies that it "does not involve or provide any basis for any liability or compensation" — a key U.S. demand because it would let the Obama administration sign on to the deal without going through the Republican-led Senate.

The adoption of the agreement was held up for nearly two hours as the United States pressed successfully to change the wording on emissions targets from saying developed countries "shall" commit to reducing emissions to they "should." Experts said that means the deal probably won't need U.S. congressional approval.

Nicaragua said it would not support the pact. Its envoy, Paul Oquist, said the agreement does not go far enough to cut global warming and help the poor countries affected by it.

Nicaragua is one of eight participating countries that haven't submitted emissions targets, after Venezuelan envoy Claudia Salerno said her country — which had been holding out — liked the agreement and had submitted its pledge.

Thousands of protesters demonstrated across Paris, saying the accord is too weak to save the planet. People held hands beneath the Eiffel Tower and stretched a two-kilometer-long (1.2-mile-long) banner from the Arc de Triomphe to the business district La Defense.

Kumi Naidoo of Greenpeace said the accord is a good start but isn't enough.

"Today the human race has joined in a common cause, but it's what happens after this conference that really matters," he said. "This deal alone won't dig us out the hole we're in, but it makes the sides less steep."

The accord does represent a breakthrough in climate negotiations. The U.N. has been working for more than two decades to persuade governments to work together to reduce the man-made emissions that scientists say are warming the planet.

The previous emissions treaty, the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, included only rich countries and the U.S. never signed on. The last climate summit, in Copenhagen in 2009, ended in failure when countries couldn't agree on a binding emissions pact.

The talks were initially scheduled to end Friday but ran over as Western powers, tiny Pacific island nations and everyone in between haggled over wording.

The main dispute centered over how to anchor the climate targets in a binding international pact, with China and other major developing countries insisting on different rules for rich and poor nations. The agreement struck a middle ground, removing a strict firewall between rich and poor nations and saying that expectations on countries to take climate action should grow as their capabilities evolve. It does not require them to do so.

Some scientists who had criticized earlier drafts as unrealistic praised the final pact for including language that essentially means the world will have to all but stop polluting with greenhouse gases by 2070 to reach the 2-degree goal, or by 2050 to reach the 1.5-degree goal.

That's because when emissions fall, nature compensates by absorbing less carbon dioxide — and can even release old pollution once there's less of it in the air, said Princeton University's Michael Oppenheimer. Forests, oceans and soil currently absorb about half the world's man-made carbon dioxide emissions.

"It means that in the end, you have to phase out carbon dioxide," said John Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.

In addition to the cuts in emissions, the goal could be reached in part by increasing how much carbon dioxide is sucked out of the air by planting forests or with futuristic technology, Oppenheimer said, but added such technology would be expensive.

French President Francois Hollande welcomed the world to a "low carbon age," saying France is ready to cut emissions even further and increase aid to poor countries that are affected. He challenged all nations to do more.

"The 12th of December, 2015, will remain a great date for the planet," Hollande declared. "In Paris, there have been many revolutions over the centuries. Today it is the most beautiful and the most peaceful revolution that has just been accomplished — a revolution for climate change."

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-12-13

[HenryB]

Great this Pact will cost the Evil United States billions dollars to be given to the righteous Chinese Indian and African Countries that are good at begging and crying.

[Pinot]

Maybe this will be the historic day the world finally did something to cool the earth for future generations. Doing nothing was not an alternative.

[canuckamuck]

Let the wealth redistribution begin.

[Grouse]

Jesus there are some cynics on here!

This agreement is good for all ( excluding the flat earth creationist numb skulls of course)

If you read the detail it's all good as far as I can see and will really drive renewable and nuclear businesses.

I'd sell your coal shares though!

[ezzra]

Well, this agreement is Obama baby and main project in life, and now that it has been put to bed,

can Mr. Obama turn to deal with the real threats on this world, namely all the terrorist groups that

thrown the world into a turmoil, if the threat will be left to fester, and the terrorist will lay their

hands on a dirty bomb, global warming will be the last thing people will have to worry about.....

[KonKorat]

We are only slowing it,not stopping it!

[up2u2]

The success with COP21 actually arriving at an agreement that goes towards addressing Global Warming / Climate Change is definitely one of many achievements for President Obama. To his credit he really stood up and drove the debate on international action on the issue. He really is a credit to the American people on the international stage.

[canuckamuck]

The success with COP21 actually arriving at an agreement that goes towards addressing Global Warming / Climate Change is definitely one of many achievements for President Obama. To his credit he really stood up and drove the debate on international action on the issue. He really is a credit to the American people on the international stage.

It's right up there with his enlisting and financing ISIS.

[brain150]

CO2 is NOT warming the planet ... this is all big BS and it seems nobody wants to even think about what this realy means !

But if anybody wants to be serious about it:

Stop tourism instantly !!! (too much CO2 in flying for pleasure)

[elgordo38]

Let the wealth redistribution begin.

It started years ago with NAFTA and trade deals with China. Remember the phrase "That huge sucking sound" Now under the TPP it will continue vigorously. All the jobs are going from countries that have environmental rules, labor rules and rights decent wages and benefits (swiftly eroding) and a democratic (sometimes I question this) way of life to countries that have environmentally nothing and burn coal (even though they agreed to rules at the recent Paris summit. (They believe that rules were made to be broken) no labor laws, communist or close to it governments (that proclaim democracy to shield what they do) slave wages and jack boot rule. Its all in the name of "if we lift these countries up they will buy more of our technology based goods (BS)" Its time to take off the Rose Colored Glasses folks!! We are being led down the garden path but the garden no longer produces anything of value to we the people anyways.

Edited December 13, 2015 by elgordo38

[elgordo38]

Jesus there are some cynics on here!

This agreement is good for all ( excluding the flat earth creationist numb skulls of course)

If you read the detail it's all good as far as I can see and will really drive renewable and nuclear businesses.

I'd sell your coal shares though!

Drum roll please! Its a simple glad handing horn blowing event to sign a piece of paper its another thing to follow through on the details for decades to come. As Greenpeace states its to little to late but its a start. Not to many years ago we were being told there was no such thing as global warming. We have been so mislead over the decades with similar hoopla that slowly died on the vine. History is littered with broken promises and pacts. I understand China will not phase out coal till 2030 and the same goes for some other Asian countries. Everything is money orientated and upgrading systems from coal to green to nuclear costs money big money. The "developed" countries have had their kick at the coal can now poorer countries are crying for their turn and I cannot blame them. Its all about the money honey not us humble sheeple. The rich want to live long enough to spend their ill gotten gain. That is the prime motivator.

[Si Thea01]

Here we go again. 43 poor countries telling the rest of the world they need to prevent rising temperatures. Many of them claim they are been ravaged by rising seas. They haven't I can assure you despite their rhetoric But wait, if you western countries, who pollute so much, give us some of your wealth then we know that a miracle wil occur. Global warming will disapppear, there will be no climate change, our counries will not be ravaged by the sea and we will all be happy little vegemites.

If anyone thinks that these clowns can alter mother nature's actions, then they too belong in the looney bin. The weather forcasters cannot accurately predict weather paterns two or three weeks in advance, yet these believers want us to accept that they can predict changes 10, 20 40 or 50 years into the future. If you believe that then what can one say.

By giving money to poorer countries governments want us to believe they can control mother nature, don't think so, they have trouble managing their own countries, yet alone the climate. Then there is the brain dead, John Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, who wonderous comment has to take the cake. “It means that in the end, you have to phase out carbon dioxide,”

So let's just do this, get rid of all the fossil fuels, the forests, oceans, life as we know it, and see the results. Total extinction. CO2 is vital for life on earth and anyone that says this is a pollutant is just being plain foolish. 40,000 people fly or drive to Paris for their little freebie BS holiday, no mention of the emissions they created in doing so. This is nothing more than wealth redistribution and a further attempt to have one world governance forced upon us through the UN.

One has to only look at the predictions made by one Professor Tim Flannery, who was made Climate Change Commissioner in Australia. Just look at his failed predictions, 2007, Australia's dam's will never be full again, and we need desalination plants to supply our water in major cities. Three stupid labor governments fell for it, built three and now they are in mothballs with all our dams being almost if not full today, as since then we have had nothing but rain, rain and more rain

When questioned about the flooding rains 5 years after his warning, he said that Climate Change cannot be ruled out. He wants an each way bet the liar. Cost to the public, billions of dollars and the current ongoing costs of millions per year to keep then maintained. Funny how they all used significant amounts of electricity, which was created through the use of fossil fuel, to operate. The guy is an absolute hyprocite and will say anything that he thinks will further his cause.

He then famously predicted that the oceans would rise by over a metre, caujsing inundation to coastal cities. Local councils, again labor backed by the greens, fell fo this and caused untold heartache and loss of finances to many people livng in coastal suburbs. But wait for it, despite his dire warnings guess where he bought a large propery, right on the rivers edge in the Hawkesbury region of NSW. No worry for him, as he darn well knew what he was sprouting was BS.

He also gave dire weather event warnings that owing to predicted heatwaves that the population of Western Sydney mental health complaints will worsen and that this would be brought about because of temperatures rsing 1-2 degress C owing to it being caused by the concrete, buildings and asphalt. Hasn't happened.

This debate can go on and on, the lies told by scientists the world over, why because they get government grants and it is what governments wants to hear. In all the years of predictions, none have come true, no island nations have been ravaged by the oceans yet these zealots keep on with their warnings and predictions, why because of the billions and billions that they are makng from scaring the bejesus out of people.

But wait, no penalities for the big polluters, what absolute and total BS yet the Australian Foreign Minister pledges $200M over 4 years to the Green Climate Fund. Can find money for this garbage yet are talking about raising taxes and wants to cut social services, all of which will affect pensioners, the aged and poorer members of the community. But why would they give a toss, they're on over $200k a year plus lurks and perks.

Take the Foreign Minister for instance, only two weeks ago left Canberra to attend a Charity Function in Perth than had the gall to send an empty VIP jet from Canberra to Perth to pick up her partner and herself and return to Canberra. Don't worry about the $30k plus cost or the greenhouse gases emiited or even those when she and her entourage travelled to Paris. Again, hypocrites of the highest order. And one wonders why there are sceptics.

[MrTee]

This calls for a firework celebration.

[up2u2]

This calls for a firework celebration.

Excellent idea!

[chuckd]

It is interesting to note that in all cases this treaty is not being called a treaty. It is being called the "Paris Agreement".

Why is it called an "agreement" rather than a "treaty"?

Let me give a personal opinion for the reasoning.

1. In accordance with the US Constitution, the President may enter into a treaty only with the advice and consent of 2/3rd of the Senate approving. Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 says this...

"[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur..."

Pretty straightforward wording. Nothing ambiguous here.

2. Within the Executive Branch there is this little thing called "Executive Agreements" (EA) wherein a sitting President may come to an agreement with a foreign power, sign an EA and put it into effect, forgoing that nasty Senate advice and consent clause.

The use of EAs is nothing new with this and many other preceding Presidents. The Iran Nuclear Agreement is the first one that comes immediately to mind. That was signed, sealed and delivered without the first assenting vote by any member of the Senate and Iran is now happily spinning their war to a nuclear weapon(s).

While it is true EAs are only valid for the remaining term of any Presidency, the incoming President must issue a proclamation after his inauguration cancelling a particular EA. Without the official cancellation, the original EA remains in full force.

My strong suspicion is this President fully intends to sign an EA and put the agreement into full effect at the earliest opportunity.

So the question remains.

Q. "When is a Treaty not a Treaty?"

A. "When the UN calls a Treaty an Agreement in order to bypass the US Constitution."

[Steely Dan]

Well, this agreement is Obama baby and main project in life, and now that it has been put to bed,

can Mr. Obama turn to deal with the real threats on this world, namely all the terrorist groups that

thrown the world into a turmoil, if the threat will be left to fester, and the terrorist will lay their

hands on a dirty bomb, global warming will be the last thing people will have to worry about.....

At least the emerging Caliphate won't have to worry so much about greenhouse gas emissions.

[up2u2]

Here we go again. 43 poor countries telling the rest of the world they need to prevent rising temperatures. Many of them claim they are been ravaged by rising seas. They haven't I can assure you despite their rhetoric But wait, if you western countries, who pollute so much, give us some of your wealth then we know that a miracle wil occur. Global warming will disapppear, there will be no climate change, our counries will not be ravaged by the sea and we will all be happy little vegemites.

If anyone thinks that these clowns can alter mother nature's actions, then they too belong in the looney bin. The weather forcasters cannot accurately predict weather paterns two or three weeks in advance, yet these believers want us to accept that they can predict changes 10, 20 40 or 50 years into the future. If you believe that then what can one say.

By giving money to poorer countries governments want us to believe they can control mother nature, don't think so, they have trouble managing their own countries, yet alone the climate. Then there is the brain dead, John Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, who wonderous comment has to take the cake. “It means that in the end, you have to phase out carbon dioxide,”

So let's just do this, get rid of all the fossil fuels, the forests, oceans, life as we know it, and see the results. Total extinction. CO2 is vital for life on earth and anyone that says this is a pollutant is just being plain foolish. 40,000 people fly or drive to Paris for their little freebie BS holiday, no mention of the emissions they created in doing so. This is nothing more than wealth redistribution and a further attempt to have one world governance forced upon us through the UN.

One has to only look at the predictions made by one Professor Tim Flannery, who was made Climate Change Commissioner in Australia. Just look at his failed predictions, 2007, Australia's dam's will never be full again, and we need desalination plants to supply our water in major cities. Three stupid labor governments fell for it, built three and now they are in mothballs with all our dams being almost if not full today, as since then we have had nothing but rain, rain and more rain

When questioned about the flooding rains 5 years after his warning, he said that Climate Change cannot be ruled out. He wants an each way bet the liar. Cost to the public, billions of dollars and the current ongoing costs of millions per year to keep then maintained. Funny how they all used significant amounts of electricity, which was created through the use of fossil fuel, to operate. The guy is an absolute hyprocite and will say anything that he thinks will further his cause.

He then famously predicted that the oceans would rise by over a metre, caujsing inundation to coastal cities. Local councils, again labor backed by the greens, fell fo this and caused untold heartache and loss of finances to many people livng in coastal suburbs. But wait for it, despite his dire warnings guess where he bought a large propery, right on the rivers edge in the Hawkesbury region of NSW. No worry for him, as he darn well knew what he was sprouting was BS.

He also gave dire weather event warnings that owing to predicted heatwaves that the population of Western Sydney mental health complaints will worsen and that this would be brought about because of temperatures rsing 1-2 degress C owing to it being caused by the concrete, buildings and asphalt. Hasn't happened.

This debate can go on and on, the lies told by scientists the world over, why because they get government grants and it is what governments wants to hear. In all the years of predictions, none have come true, no island nations have been ravaged by the oceans yet these zealots keep on with their warnings and predictions, why because of the billions and billions that they are makng from scaring the bejesus out of people.

But wait, no penalities for the big polluters, what absolute and total BS yet the Australian Foreign Minister pledges $200M over 4 years to the Green Climate Fund. Can find money for this garbage yet are talking about raising taxes and wants to cut social services, all of which will affect pensioners, the aged and poorer members of the community. But why would they give a toss, they're on over $200k a year plus lurks and perks.

Take the Foreign Minister for instance, only two weeks ago left Canberra to attend a Charity Function in Perth than had the gall to send an empty VIP jet from Canberra to Perth to pick up her partner and herself and return to Canberra. Don't worry about the $30k plus cost or the greenhouse gases emiited or even those when she and her entourage travelled to Paris. Again, hypocrites of the highest order. And one wonders why there are sceptics.

Heard it all before. It is just getting boring now. Same old Fossil Fuel propaganda over and over again. Obama should be congratulated he has done well. China also.

The Carbon footprint abatement for a private jet from Canberra to Perth return would be about $US1. The real issue there is the waste of $30K of Taxpayers money that could have gone to subsidising Clean Energy research.

[up2u2]

Well, this agreement is Obama baby and main project in life, and now that it has been put to bed,

can Mr. Obama turn to deal with the real threats on this world, namely all the terrorist groups that

thrown the world into a turmoil, if the threat will be left to fester, and the terrorist will lay their

hands on a dirty bomb, global warming will be the last thing people will have to worry about.....

At least the emerging Caliphate won't have to worry so much about greenhouse gas emissions.

Oh yes they will. They rely on the illegal sale of Oil. The days of the Arab world are numbered. As the West gradually transitions to Clean Energy the economic noose will slowly tighten. That aspect of Clean Energy is one I can't wait for.

[Usernames]

Unless they addressed runaway population growth, this was a waste of time.

[Si Thea01]

This calls for a firework celebration.

You're right but in the Nanny State of NSW, Australia, they have banned such celebrations as they reckon us poor plebs cannot do so safely. Instead the hire a company specialising in such niceties at a nice little cost of around 8 million and then charge the populace to attend harbour foreshore facilities and then make those areas alcohol free zones.

I am still patrotic toward my country just P'd off with the moronic bureaucrats running the country. Must have had a lousy childhood so they want to inflict their left over misery on the rest of the population. It is so unfortunate that many chidren and young adults of today will never know the lifetime that we experienced growing up.

[Si Thea01]

Here we go again. 43 poor countries telling the rest of the world they need to prevent rising temperatures. Many of them claim they are been ravaged by rising seas. They haven't I can assure you despite their rhetoric But wait, if you western countries, who pollute so much, give us some of your wealth then we know that a miracle wil occur. Global warming will disapppear, there will be no climate change, our counries will not be ravaged by the sea and we will all be happy little vegemites.

If anyone thinks that these clowns can alter mother nature's actions, then they too belong in the looney bin. The weather forcasters cannot accurately predict weather paterns two or three weeks in advance, yet these believers want us to accept that they can predict changes 10, 20 40 or 50 years into the future. If you believe that then what can one say.

By giving money to poorer countries governments want us to believe they can control mother nature, don't think so, they have trouble managing their own countries, yet alone the climate. Then there is the brain dead, John Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, who wonderous comment has to take the cake. “It means that in the end, you have to phase out carbon dioxide,”

So let's just do this, get rid of all the fossil fuels, the forests, oceans, life as we know it, and see the results. Total extinction. CO2 is vital for life on earth and anyone that says this is a pollutant is just being plain foolish. 40,000 people fly or drive to Paris for their little freebie BS holiday, no mention of the emissions they created in doing so. This is nothing more than wealth redistribution and a further attempt to have one world governance forced upon us through the UN.

One has to only look at the predictions made by one Professor Tim Flannery, who was made Climate Change Commissioner in Australia. Just look at his failed predictions, 2007, Australia's dam's will never be full again, and we need desalination plants to supply our water in major cities. Three stupid labor governments fell for it, built three and now they are in mothballs with all our dams being almost if not full today, as since then we have had nothing but rain, rain and more rain

When questioned about the flooding rains 5 years after his warning, he said that Climate Change cannot be ruled out. He wants an each way bet the liar. Cost to the public, billions of dollars and the current ongoing costs of millions per year to keep then maintained. Funny how they all used significant amounts of electricity, which was created through the use of fossil fuel, to operate. The guy is an absolute hyprocite and will say anything that he thinks will further his cause.

He then famously predicted that the oceans would rise by over a metre, caujsing inundation to coastal cities. Local councils, again labor backed by the greens, fell fo this and caused untold heartache and loss of finances to many people livng in coastal suburbs. But wait for it, despite his dire warnings guess where he bought a large propery, right on the rivers edge in the Hawkesbury region of NSW. No worry for him, as he darn well knew what he was sprouting was BS.

He also gave dire weather event warnings that owing to predicted heatwaves that the population of Western Sydney mental health complaints will worsen and that this would be brought about because of temperatures rsing 1-2 degress C owing to it being caused by the concrete, buildings and asphalt. Hasn't happened.

This debate can go on and on, the lies told by scientists the world over, why because they get government grants and it is what governments wants to hear. In all the years of predictions, none have come true, no island nations have been ravaged by the oceans yet these zealots keep on with their warnings and predictions, why because of the billions and billions that they are makng from scaring the bejesus out of people.

But wait, no penalities for the big polluters, what absolute and total BS yet the Australian Foreign Minister pledges $200M over 4 years to the Green Climate Fund. Can find money for this garbage yet are talking about raising taxes and wants to cut social services, all of which will affect pensioners, the aged and poorer members of the community. But why would they give a toss, they're on over $200k a year plus lurks and perks.

Take the Foreign Minister for instance, only two weeks ago left Canberra to attend a Charity Function in Perth than had the gall to send an empty VIP jet from Canberra to Perth to pick up her partner and herself and return to Canberra. Don't worry about the $30k plus cost or the greenhouse gases emiited or even those when she and her entourage travelled to Paris. Again, hypocrites of the highest order. And one wonders why there are sceptics.

Heard it all before. It is just getting boring now. Same old Fossil Fuel propaganda over and over again. Obama should be congratulated he has done well. China also.

The Carbon footprint abatement for a private jet from Canberra to Perth return would be about $US1. The real issue there is the waste of $30K of Taxpayers money that could have gone to subsidising Clean Energy research.

There are many issues that I have raised but when some one has no answer to what has been raised they resort to fossil fuel propaganda and the old line that everything one says is boring. Are you saying that everything that has been listed here is not the truth?

But why is it that you do not address the lies that are being told, for instance, the fake figures issued out of East Anglia University, all of which have been proven, through emails, that various scientists were less than liberal with the truth. The real issue is the waste of taxpayers money on the flight, I would say there are more relevant issues, such as the waste of taxpayers money subsidising the so called clean energy, wind farms, solar heating, etc., etc. No one is denying we need new energy but to lay the blame on CO2 as being the culprit is totally untrue. Never heard of the clean coal technology now being used n Australian power stations?

Answer me this if you will. Is CO2 a poisonous pollutant or a gas that is necessary for life as we know it? Do you understand that what you are referring to as a polutant is what we breath out and plants need it to fourish? What is the difference between carbon dioxide and carbon?

Why is it stated that "climate change policies" are aimed at "carbon pollution?" I thought that they were aimed at reducing emissions of carbon dioxide. There is neither the need to abbreviate carbon dioxide to carbon; as the exercise of abbreviation renders it inaccurate. A bald-faced, quite deliberate lie actually. So if they call carbon dioxide "carbon pollution", in this or any other universe, why then don't they refer to rain as "hydrogen pollution".

Once last question. are you able to provide the tonnage emitted and the calculations you used to derive at your return trip compensation of US$1.00. Or was this just a guess?

Edited December 13, 2015 by Si Thea01

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed.

[stevenl]

The success with COP21 actually arriving at an agreement that goes towards addressing Global Warming / Climate Change is definitely one of many achievements for President Obama. To his credit he really stood up and drove the debate on international action on the issue. He really is a credit to the American people on the international stage.

I don't think it is going far enough, but it seems this was the maximum that could be achieved. We're heading in the right direction.

[lungbing]

I'll start believing in 'climate change' when they stop hundreds of free-loading delegates flying to exotic places for their conferences, and when their climate models are based on the truth and not what they wish was the truth.

[Grouse]

CO2 is NOT warming the planet ... this is all big BS and it seems nobody wants to even think about what this realy means !

But if anybody wants to be serious about it:

Stop tourism instantly !!! (too much CO2 in flying for pleasure)

Nurse! Nurse! He's out of bed again!

Pretty please explain why so very many eminent scientists are wrong but you are right?

No comment?

Nurse, the rubber gloves please!

[Si Thea01]

CO2 is NOT warming the planet ... this is all big BS and it seems nobody wants to even think about what this realy means !

But if anybody wants to be serious about it:

Stop tourism instantly !!! (too much CO2 in flying for pleasure)

Nurse! Nurse! He's out of bed again!

Pretty please explain why so very many eminent scientists are wrong but you are right?

No comment?

Nurse, the rubber gloves please!

So according to you any one that has an opinion different to yours is wrong. It appears you are like the others, no legitimate debate forthcoming, just a snide reply to someone who does not believe in the rort. There are just as many eminent scientists who have a differing view also. So how does that fit your argument.

Are you able to answer the question, if carbon dioxide is such a worry, are they going to stop us all from exhaling, the cows from flatulating and all the people who use planes to stop travelling the world. Also, how can humans control mother nature, havent seen that happening lately but then any extreme weather will be the result of global warming, climate change, carbon polution or whatever other name they decide to change it to to suit the situation.

What about the hypocrites, all 40,000 of them who travelled to Paris for their freeloading get together. Didn't they add to the so called carbon pollution. I'll ask you, do you know the difference between carbon and carbon dioxide, given the way you want to deride another, I'd say not.

[stevenl]

CO2 is NOT warming the planet ... this is all big BS and it seems nobody wants to even think about what this realy means !

But if anybody wants to be serious about it:

Stop tourism instantly !!! (too much CO2 in flying for pleasure)

Nurse! Nurse! He's out of bed again!

Pretty please explain why so very many eminent scientists are wrong but you are right?

No comment?

Nurse, the rubber gloves please!

So according to you any one that has an opinion different to yours is wrong. It appears you are like the others, no legitimate debate forthcoming, just a snide reply to someone who does not believe in the rort. There are just as many eminent scientists who have a differing view also. So how does that fit your argument.

Are you able to answer the question, if carbon dioxide is such a worry, are they going to stop us all from exhaling, the cows from flatulating and all the people who use planes to stop travelling the world. Also, how can humans control mother nature, havent seen that happening lately but then any extreme weather will be the result of global warming, climate change, carbon polution or whatever other name they decide to change it to to suit the situation.

What about the hypocrites, all 40,000 of them who travelled to Paris for their freeloading get together. Didn't they add to the so called carbon pollution. I'll ask you, do you know the difference between carbon and carbon dioxide, given the way you want to deride another, I'd say not.

There is nothing left to debate.

The scientific community is in unison, only some laymen are still in denial

[brain150]

Scientific facts:

CO2 concentration follows the rise in temperature !

Most CO2 is deluded in the oceans and cold water can store more CO2 than warm water.

With rising temperatures of the oceans the CO2 is released into the atmosphere [delay is about 800 years]

... rise in temperature comes first ! So how can CO2 be the cause ?

Concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is 0.037% !

Humans are responsible for 6% of this 0.037% !

... so with 0.037% * 6% = 0.00037*0.06=0.0000222*100=0.00222% of total human made CO2 it should be very obvious to be just a bad JOKE !!!

It's like a drop of oil in the ocean will kill all life in the ocean !!! Simple BS !!!

But ... I just do simple math !

You follow the brainwashing media ... no surprise really

[brain150]

Everybody is free to tell me the numbers are wrong ... but if so, please prove it !!!