Historic pact to slow global warming is celebrated in Paris

[stevenl]

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

Yes, the whole scientific community is wrong but you're right. Sure

[brain150]

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

Yes, the whole scientific community is wrong but you're right. Sure

That's not true at all.

Pretty much all real climate scientists have left the IPCC after finding out that the whole story has nothing

to do with science at all.

The scientific community [no the brainwash media community] has a very different view on the climate.

The good thing for the IPCC is, that people like you just follow every lie, no matter how big it is, just because it's on TV or in the newspaper!

... but if you are really so scared of CO2 you might want to ask the vulcanoes to stop errupting. Or the aints from decomposing wood ....

[stevenl]

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

Yes, the whole scientific community is wrong but you're right. Sure

That's not true at all.

Pretty much all real climate scientists have left the IPCC after finding out that the whole story has nothing

to do with science at all.

The scientific community [no the brainwash media community] has a very different view on the climate.

The good thing for the IPCC is, that people like you just follow every lie, no matter how big it is, just because it's on TV or in the newspaper!

... but if you are really so scared of CO2 you might want to ask the vulcanoes to stop errupting. Or the aints from decomposing wood ....

People like me, you mean the well educated, independently thinking people, who think for themselves and don't automatically follow the opinion of others but tend to differ.

Sure.

[ggt]

The NYTimes is hailing this agreement as a great victory for Barrack Obama...this and Obamacare will seal his legacy they boast...

The meeting was held in Paris, France...Obama did not even attend...

Mr. Obama strode triumphantly into the Cabinet Room of the White House to declare victory! Reminiscent of a Roman Emperor entering Rome riding in a horse drawn chariot and waving to the adoring crowds...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/us/president-obama-once-a-guest-now-a-leader-in-world-talks.html?_r=0

Obama and the NYTimes...never misses a chance to beat their own drum or to politicize an event...

[Pinot]

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.

Republicans can't have nice things. Yeah, we finally did something about global warming, but...there is the emerging Caliphate. Those damn "Debbi Downer" wingnut Republicans.

Hey Debbi- The "emerging Caliphate" is not a real thing. I know it is for you and the rest of wingnuttia, but it's not a "real thing" for normal people. I know only the right wing can save the world, but...let's let the adults handle that.

Let's all celebrate! A great thing has happened. The world is focused on stopping global warming.

[sirineou]

The Flat Earth society on the right says that rising ocean levels are not a problem because the water will spill over the edge.

[lostboy]

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

Yes, the whole scientific community is wrong but you're right. Sure

That's not true at all.

Pretty much all real climate scientists have left the IPCC after finding out that the whole story has nothing

to do with science at all.

The scientific community [no the brainwash media community] has a very different view on the climate.

The good thing for the IPCC is, that people like you just follow every lie, no matter how big it is, just because it's on TV or in the newspaper!

... but if you are really so scared of CO2 you might want to ask the vulcanoes to stop errupting. Or the aints from decomposing wood ....

You have entirely no justification or evidence for your wild assertion that pretty much all real climate science have left the IPCC. Whey should be believe you on this? You have what credibility to make such a statement? If you are as immoderate on this issue, then how should we assess the validity of the numbers you have started throwing around.

Funny, you demand proofs that your numbers are wrong but then provide nothing in support of this ridiculous claim. From Wikipedia, a fairly obvious and easily access source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Climate_science_opinion2.png and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

It is called scientific consensus for a reason. Clearly you are not part of the solution. Clearly this is a vast conspiracy targeted against you personally. You have no power to influence the decision on the allocation of resources. Thank goodness. Keep tilting at windmills on social media.

Edited December 13, 2015 by lostboy

[Pinot]

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

Yes, the whole scientific community is wrong but you're right. Sure

That's not true at all.

Pretty much all real climate scientists have left the IPCC after finding out that the whole story has nothing

to do with science at all.

The scientific community [no the brainwash media community] has a very different view on the climate.

The good thing for the IPCC is, that people like you just follow every lie, no matter how big it is, just because it's on TV or in the newspaper!

... but if you are really so scared of CO2 you might want to ask the vulcanoes to stop errupting. Or the aints from decomposing wood ....

You have entirely no justification or evidence for your wild assertion that pretty much all real climate science have left the IPCC. Whey should be believe you on this? You have what credibility to make such a statement? If you are as immoderate on this issue, then how should we assess the validity of the numbers you have started throwing around.

Funny, you demand proofs that your numbers are wrong but then provide nothing in support of this ridiculous claim. From Wikipedia, a fairly obvious and easily access source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Climate_science_opinion2.png and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

It is called scientific consensus for a reason. Clearly you are not part of the solution. Clearly this is a vast conspiracy targeted against you personally. You have no power to influence the decision on the allocation of resources. Thank goodness. Keep tilting at windmills on social media.

Stop throwing the opinions of real climate scientists at them. They use wingnut scientists to decide what's fact. Thank you Fox News.

The fact that 98% of the top 200 Global Climate scientists believe there is man made global warming is meaningless to them.

Edited December 13, 2015 by Pinot

[up2u2]

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?

"Are you saying that everything that has been listed here is not the truth?" Correct. It is cherry picked sciency rubbish from Climate Denier blogsites funded by the Fossil Fuel industry.

"the fake figures issued out of East Anglia University...." The so called 'Climategate': "Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct."

"taxpayers money subsidising the so called clean energy" So taxpayers money spent on subsidising polluting Coal Mines, Tar Sands and fracking is okay but taxpayers money spend on research and development of Clean Energy and investment in building Clean Energy infrastructure that addresses GW / CC is a waste of taxpayers money? A very ignorant position.

"...to lay the blame on CO2 as being the culprit is totally untrue." Man made CO₂ effecting Global Warming is unequivocal. Powell et al 2015: Out of 24,210 peer reviewed Climate Articles published during 2013-2014 24,205 confirmed man made Global Warming.

"Never heard of the clean coal technology now being used n Australian power stations" Of course and it is definitely part of the mix in transitioning to Clean Energy. Countries like China and India need to bring Coal Fired Power stations online in the short term the 'cleaner' these power stations can be the better for everyone.

"Do you understand that what you are referring to as a polutant (sic) is what we breath out and plants need it to fourish(sic)?" Naturally occurring CO₂ is not a pollutant and is fundamental to Human survival. Without it we would all die. Naturally occurring Greenhouse gases elevate Earth's Global temperatures by 32^OC enabling Humans to survive. Adding trillions of tonnes of CO₂ by burning Fossil Fuels into the atmosphere causes CO₂ to become a pollutant as it adversely impacts on the Greenhouse Effect and causes Global Warming leading to Climate Change.

"What is the difference between carbon dioxide and carbon?" Carbon = C one carbon atom, Carbon Dioxide = CO₂ one Carbon atom and two Oxygen atoms. Coal is rich in Carbon when it is combusted the Carbon is released and forms Carbon Dioxide. Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide increases and atmospheric Oxygen decreases. (A syntesis reaction C + O₂ ----> CO then CO + O₂ ------> CO₂ .So it is a double wammy generating a lot of heat (exothermic))

"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,.....". It isn't a lie it is that you don't understand CO₂ pollution is derived from the burning of Carbon (see above), hence Carbon pollution.

"why then don't they refer to rain as "hydrogen pollution" If water exploded they would but it doesn't. lol

"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?" Flying from Vancouver to Paris to attend COP21 creates approximately 1 tonne of CO₂ gas. If a delegate chooses they can offset their Carbon Footprint by paying $1. The delegates who pay the offset are wearing a White Lanyard at the conference. "Since 2012, the UNFCCC secretariat has been offsetting all emissions from travel funded from its own resources." So Canberra to Perth return would be well under $1.

[LarryBird]

The agreement is a COMPLETE JOKE. The reason it's non-binding is because the leaders know they can't make it binding. There will NEVER be a cooperative solution to global warming. Anybody that thinks there can be has never heard of the tragedy of the commons.

I can only imagine the mega boner Obama had when he was signing away the potential to send billions of dollars to 3rd world dictators..

The amazing thing about liberals is how all you have to do is mention that you're trying to solve something that they see as a problem, and they're on board. It doesn't actually matter if the plan has any chance of succeeding, or might actually be detrimental.

[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.

There is nothing left to debate.

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

Being a bit liberal with he truth aren't we? The scientific community is not in unison. Typical of idealists, sprouting untruths in an attempt to stifle debate. Oh that's right, according to yourself there is nothing left to debate. In your case, that is correct, as regardless of what has been posted on here, there has been nothing of relevancy raised by yourself, and for you to debate, I don't think so, as debating is well above your pay grade. So only a few layman (a

person without professional or specialized knowledge in a particular subject) are still denial

Do you know, oh that's a silly question, of course you don't, otherwise you would not have written such an outlandish post but don't worry, I'll help you. When a grand total of 52 UN scientists authored the IPCC 2007, summary for Policymakers, there were 1000 dissenting Scientists ( a person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences.) and this number has grown exponentially since then. So what does that say for you little throw away line, "Only some layman are in denial". See, never a realist, just an idealist and if you do not know the difference I'll help you and in layman's terms; Realism focuses on ‘what actually is’ whilst Idealism focuses on ‘what could be’

[RickBradford]

It's fair to say that the Paris climate pact was 'historic'.

It showed, once and for all, that no government in the world is prepared to commit itself to doing anything more than window dressing towards "solving" the "problem" of global warming.

In effect, the climate agreement says : "We, the nations of the world, commit ourselves to slowing global warming by doing nothing, saying a lot, promising to be good, and can we do it all again next year?"

If you believe the catastrophic hype that we're "killing the planet", now's the time to plan that move to Irkutsk, because nothing agreed at Paris is going to make the slightest difference.

[up2u2]

It's fair to say that the Paris climate pact was 'historic'.

It showed, once and for all, that no government in the world is prepared to commit itself to doing anything more than window dressing towards "solving" the "problem" of global warming.

In effect, the climate agreement says : "We, the nations of the world, commit ourselves to slowing global warming by doing nothing, saying a lot, promising to be good, and can we do it all again next year?"

If you believe the catastrophic hype that we're "killing the planet", now's the time to plan that move to Irkutsk, because nothing agreed at Paris is going to make the slightest difference.

Absolutely historic. For roughly 197 countries to come together and form an agreement signed by all and state their pledge to reduce Carbon pollution is unbelievable. Another important point is the Climate Deniers have been silenced and didn't really form part of the media reporting on the conference. Seems the majority of Leaders have stopped listening to their stupid faux science. Which is an important breakthrough.

Credit should really go to the scientific community around the world that pushed back against the Climate Denial sciencey gobbledygook and showed, using the science and the facts, what absolute drivel it is. It was all getting a little ridiculous.

Of course you still have the hard core right wing nutters banging on about 'the pause', 'it's the Sun', 'an Ice Age coming', 'It's all a big conspiracy', 'it is just normal changes', 'the data is fraudulent', 'it's just scientists making money', 'climategate'... etc etc etc ad nauseum but what is different now is politicians and rational people are no longer taking any notice of them.

Happy days.

[Si Thea01]

It's fair to say that the Paris climate pact was 'historic'.

It showed, once and for all, that no government in the world is prepared to commit itself to doing anything more than window dressing towards "solving" the "problem" of global warming.

In effect, the climate agreement says : "We, the nations of the world, commit ourselves to slowing global warming by doing nothing, saying a lot, promising to be good, and can we do it all again next year?"

If you believe the catastrophic hype that we're "killing the planet", now's the time to plan that move to Irkutsk, because nothing agreed at Paris is going to make the slightest difference.

Absolutely historic. For roughly 197 countries to come together and form an agreement signed by all and state their pledge to reduce Carbon pollution is unbelievable. Another important point is the Climate Deniers have been silenced and didn't really form part of the media reporting on the conference. Seems the majority of Leaders have stopped listening to their stupid faux science. Which is an important breakthrough.

Credit should really go to the scientific community around the world that pushed back against the Climate Denial sciencey gobbledygook and showed, using the science and the facts, what absolute drivel it is. It was all getting a little ridiculous.

Of course you still have the hard core right wing nutters banging on about 'the pause', 'it's the Sun', 'an Ice Age coming', 'It's all a big conspiracy', 'it is just normal changes', 'the data is fraudulent', 'it's just scientists making money', 'climategate'... etc etc etc ad nauseum but what is different now is politicians and rational people are no longer taking any notice of them.

Happy days.

Yes, one word says it all. Unbelievable.

[RickBradford]

Absolutely historic. For roughly 197 countries to come together and form an agreement signed by all and state their pledge to reduce Carbon pollution is unbelievable.

Half right. They signed a legally binding agreement not to have legally binding limits on emissions. For the effect it will have, it might be the most worthless piece of paper since the Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawed war — about a decade prior to the outbreak of World War II. And that is the view of many Alarmists such as James Hansen, not just that of the hated evil Deniers.

Skeptics around the world welcome this agreement. All things considered, it is far better that the silly climate activists occupy themselves with grand meetings, pursuing their ego vanity projects and wasting their time with the mental exertions required to believe their own PR. Otherwise they could do some real damage out in the real world.

[up2u2]

Absolutely historic. For roughly 197 countries to come together and form an agreement signed by all and state their pledge to reduce Carbon pollution is unbelievable.

Half right. They signed a legally binding agreement not to have legally binding limits on emissions. For the effect it will have, it might be the most worthless piece of paper since the Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawed war — about a decade prior to the outbreak of World War II. And that is the view of many Alarmists such as James Hansen, not just that of the hated evil Deniers.

Skeptics around the world welcome this agreement. All things considered, it is far better that the silly climate activists occupy themselves with grand meetings, pursuing their ego vanity projects and wasting their time with the mental exertions required to believe their own PR. Otherwise they could do some real damage out in the real world.

The hard core rusted on Climate Deniers can cling to that little glimmer of hope that nothing will be done on GW / CC. The science has now moved on. The Climate Denial had no impact on the conference and the politics has moved on also.

What finally beat the Deniers is the people actually seeing the changes in Climates around the world and the extreme weather events beginning to occur and the Climate Denier 'echo chamber' became just plain foolish. Also politicians become aware of the cost of doing nothing when they looked at the bill for just a slight increase in extreme weather events. Another key driver is politicians now understand that there is great wealth and new tech industries and jobs in Clean Energy.

Also the majority of people are much more educated on the issue so it is becoming more difficult for Deniers to fool people. They just simply know that the Deniers pseudo science is clap trap and tend to ignore it and they know it is being generated from the Fossil Fuel industry.

A scientific consensus on GW / CC and now with a unanimous agreement a political consensus on GW / CC.

Happy days

[RickBradford]

Happy days

Happy days for some, certainly.

Happy days for China, which has free rein to keep increasing its CO2 emissions until at least 2030, and to build 363 new coal-fired power plants in the next decade.

Happy days for India, which is now free to pursue its plan of doubling coal production to 1 billion tons by 2020 and doubling CO2 emissions by 2030.

Happy days for the coal industry, with vast new markets to supply - more than 1000 “high-efficiency” coal-fired electricity generation plants are planned or under construction in Asian nations already

Happy days for Russia, Brazil and Indonesia, who can now get on with exploiting their natural resources free from UN interference.

Happy days for bureaucrats, lawyers, bankers and so on, who have vast numbers of new documents to play with and push around the table.

In case it escaped your notice, COP21 wasn't about "deniers", or science, or climate or weather. It was about political horse-trading.

The UN, led by that prize jackass Christina 'Tinkerbell' Figueres, had a free hand to negotiate a climate treaty which might do something towards "solving" the "problem" of global warming. All they got was some happy clapping.

Of course the delegates were happy. They now have a binding agreement to do exactly what they please in their own countries, free from interference.

It was a dud. A big zero. Or, in James Hansen's words, "a fraud", "a fake", "worthless" and "bullshit."

(For anyone interested in the detailed data of this historic failure. the Climate Action Tracker website is a useful resource: http://climateactiontracker.org/)

[stevenl]

Happy days

Happy days for some, certainly.

Happy days for China, which has free rein to keep increasing its CO2 emissions until at least 2030, and to build 363 new coal-fired power plants in the next decade.

Happy days for India, which is now free to pursue its plan of doubling coal production to 1 billion tons by 2020 and doubling CO2 emissions by 2030.

Happy days for the coal industry, with vast new markets to supply - more than 1000 “high-efficiency” coal-fired electricity generation plants are planned or under construction in Asian nations already

Happy days for Russia, Brazil and Indonesia, who can now get on with exploiting their natural resources free from UN interference.

Happy days for bureaucrats, lawyers, bankers and so on, who have vast numbers of new documents to play with and push around the table.

In case it escaped your notice, COP21 wasn't about "deniers", or science, or climate or weather. It was about political horse-trading.

The UN, led by that prize jackass Christina 'Tinkerbell' Figueres, had a free hand to negotiate a climate treaty which might do something towards "solving" the "problem" of global warming. All they got was some happy clapping.

Of course the delegates were happy. They now have a binding agreement to do exactly what they please in their own countries, free from interference.

It was a dud. A big zero. Or, in James Hansen's words, "a fraud", "a fake", "worthless" and "bullshit."

(For anyone interested in the detailed data of this historic failure. the Climate Action Tracker website is a useful resource: http://climateactiontracker.org/)

Always pointing at others.

Take your own responsibility and do something.

[up2u2]

Happy days

Happy days for some, certainly.

Happy days for China, which has free rein to keep increasing its CO2 emissions until at least 2030, and to build 363 new coal-fired power plants in the next decade.

Happy days for India, which is now free to pursue its plan of doubling coal production to 1 billion tons by 2020 and doubling CO2 emissions by 2030.

Happy days for the coal industry, with vast new markets to supply - more than 1000 “high-efficiency” coal-fired electricity generation plants are planned or under construction in Asian nations already

Happy days for Russia, Brazil and Indonesia, who can now get on with exploiting their natural resources free from UN interference.

Happy days for bureaucrats, lawyers, bankers and so on, who have vast numbers of new documents to play with and push around the table.

In case it escaped your notice, COP21 wasn't about "deniers", or science, or climate or weather. It was about political horse-trading.

The UN, led by that prize jackass Christina 'Tinkerbell' Figueres, had a free hand to negotiate a climate treaty which might do something towards "solving" the "problem" of global warming. All they got was some happy clapping.

Of course the delegates were happy. They now have a binding agreement to do exactly what they please in their own countries, free from interference.

It was a dud. A big zero. Or, in James Hansen's words, "a fraud", "a fake", "worthless" and "bullshit."

(For anyone interested in the detailed data of this historic failure. the Climate Action Tracker website is a useful resource: http://climateactiontracker.org/)

Not many listening to negative Climate Denier rhetoric anymore RB. Everyone is pretty much moving forward and leaving you far behind. James Hansen is a nobody.

[RickBradford]

James Hansen is a nobody.

It would actually be difficult to find anyone more central to the history of the global warming scare than Hansen.

It was Hansen's testimony to the US Congressional Committee in 1988 which effectively kicked off the entire global warming scare as we know it today. The New York Times reported it as "Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate."

For no less than 32 years, from 1981 to 2013, he was the head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, essentially NASA's climate research arm. He is one of the most prominent and most-published figures in the history of climate modelling and global warming estimation.

To call him a 'nobody' demonstrates breathtaking ignorance.

[up2u2]

James Hansen is a nobody.

It would actually be difficult to find anyone more central to the history of the global warming scare than Hansen.

It was Hansen's testimony to the US Congressional Committee in 1988 which effectively kicked off the entire global warming scare as we know it today. The New York Times reported it as "Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate."

For no less than 32 years, from 1981 to 2013, he was the head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, essentially NASA's climate research arm. He is one of the most prominent and most-published figures in the history of climate modelling and global warming estimation.

To call him a 'nobody' demonstrates breathtaking ignorance.

To think James is relevant to the political debate on GW / CC is ignorant. He just simply isn't. You demonstrate exactly why he is no longer relevant. He makes comments that are sucked into your 'Climate Denier Echo Chamber' and get flipped around in support of no action on GW / CC at all. Unfortunately his good intentions back fire.

He himself admits he stayed far to long at NASA and should have stepped aside many years before he did and let the younger scientists take over.

The US Congress? lol you're kidding aren't you? The best Congress Fossil Fuel money can buy.

[RickBradford]

To think James is relevant to the political debate on GW / CC is ignorant. He just simply isn't

I never said he was. A very lame strawman argument.

The fact is, he was the central figure in bringing global warming concerns into the mainstream political arena in the US, a prominent and powerful figure in the debate for 30 years, and is thus a very important pioneering figure in the whole mess.

No-one who has studied this subject even slightly would dismiss him as a 'nobody'.

[Pinot]

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.

TV Teabagger spews in. Can't resist writing some ridiculous, off subject lie they heard on Fox News or from the rest of their wingnut media. That last remark is absolutely bizarre, but it's comforting food for thought for these guys.

Republicans are the only major political party in the World, that don't believe there is global warming. Possibly the result of their fearful little brains being stuffed with right wing nonsense and hate.

And oh, do they ever hate that negro in the Whitehouse.

In my little Phuket beach town, there aren't many Americans, only a handful. Yet, half of them are wingnuts. Of course they can't help themselves and blabber their rightwing nonsense to the guys from other countries who just see them as idiots and make fun of them. I'm friendly with everybody but I won't discuss politics with wingnuts and generally avoid them. Yeah, we can talk sports but it soon becomes Obama blah blah blah.

Life as a wingnut.

[Si Thea01]

Absolutely historic. For roughly 197 countries to come together and form an agreement signed by all and state their pledge to reduce Carbon pollution is unbelievable.

Half right. They signed a legally binding agreement not to have legally binding limits on emissions. For the effect it will have, it might be the most worthless piece of paper since the Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawed war — about a decade prior to the outbreak of World War II. And that is the view of many Alarmists such as James Hansen, not just that of the hated evil Deniers.

Skeptics around the world welcome this agreement. All things considered, it is far better that the silly climate activists occupy themselves with grand meetings, pursuing their ego vanity projects and wasting their time with the mental exertions required to believe their own PR. Otherwise they could do some real damage out in the real world.

The hard core rusted on Climate Deniers can cling to that little glimmer of hope that nothing will be done on GW / CC. The science has now moved on. The Climate Denial had no impact on the conference and the politics has moved on also.

What finally beat the Deniers is the people actually seeing the changes in Climates around the world and the extreme weather events beginning to occur and the Climate Denier 'echo chamber' became just plain foolish. Also politicians become aware of the cost of doing nothing when they looked at the bill for just a slight increase in extreme weather events. Another key driver is politicians now understand that there is great wealth and new tech industries and jobs in Clean Energy.

Also the majority of people are much more educated on the issue so it is becoming more difficult for Deniers to fool people. They just simply know that the Deniers pseudo science is clap trap and tend to ignore it and they know it is being generated from the Fossil Fuel industry.

A scientific consensus on GW / CC and now with a unanimous agreement a political consensus on GW / CC.

Happy days

The so called deniers are not denying anything about true climate change, they are just fed up with the exaggerations being proffered in the attempt to jusify the untruths that are being used in an attempt to scare people into being believers. Anyone who thinks rationally knows that pollution exists, that it isn't CO2 but whaat does exist should be curtailed but nothing will happen through wealth redistribution, except that more corrupt politicians and scammers will get their snouts in the trough. But according to the believers, money changing hands can control mother nature and alter tempertures. Please show me how and do not resort to the climate change bible that so many of you turn to in times of need.

Answer this please. If scientists, not associated with the believers, are unable to predict weather occurrences, with accuracy, two or three weeks in advance, how are those on the believers side able to predict what will occur in 20, 30 or 50 years time. I know,Super Scientists paid by those who need to have this scaremongering continue. I won't be around when these so called predictions allegedly come to fruition, neither will most on here. Is it because they do so as one will never know and they cannot bre called to task for their BS predictions. The many lies put out by the so called professor Tim Flanery, the Australian Climate Change Commissioner and the billions of dollars he has cost the taxpayers should be enough to see him hung, drawn and quarted but no, this liar just goes o to make millions more through out and falsehoods.

So there is the scientific consensus and an unanimous agreement, really? Another line from the book of exaggerations that is being used to justify the alarmists point of view. So the views of over 1000 dissenting sceintists have no relevance to the debate and, according to some, is only propoganda from the fossil fuel industry that is being used to justify their argument. So what is the so called evidence presented by the alarmists called, the gospel as spoken by Al Gore, his climate crediting huckstering partner, David Blood, formerly of Goldman Sachs and the Canadian Billionaire, Jeffrey Skolls. And I suppose the other billionaires are now getting involved because they too believe the hype. I'd say they have looked at this as new way of adding to their bottom line, while all the suckers pay. Remember, they didn't get rich by giving things away, not unless there was a huge return in the offering.

So it's happy days is it, I'd suggest that you and the others stop hyperventilating, just think of the amount of CO2 you contibuting in doing so. Oh but wait, if you pay your dollar to erase your carbon footprint, then everything is ok. Now, before you escalate your joy into a full state of euphoria just sit back, take a deep breath and remember that this agreement is not legally binding unless joined by a minimum of 55 countries that allegedly represent 55 percent of green house gas emissions. Such parties will need to sign the agreement in New York between 22 April 2016 and 21 April 2017, and also adopt it within their own legal systems.

Let's all wait and see, there is over 2 years before you can even imagine gloating so don't jump the gun bu thent given their past records, there will be further talkfests, a lot more hot air and for what, so a few selected will benefit while plebs like you will be short changed in order to fill their coffers. Happy days for who, not you, I can assure you of that.

[CharlieH]

Sarcastic flame removed.

[Chicog]

It makes me laughing watching those that deny man-made climate change stick their heads in the sand.

It seems to be beyond their comprehension that big oil would spend billions obfuscating the science to allow them to continue trousering cash with no concern for the consequences.

They don't seem to understand that the climate change deniers in the House that they so admire are all on the Big oil payroll.

And let's not forget all the state legislators that made it a CRIME to reveal the chemicals being pumped into the ground by Frackers.

These companies do not give a toss about the environment, and it's in their interests to spread pseudoscience and lies to keep themselves in the game.

You only have to look at all the witless morons that screamed about Solyndra going under. Most of them are so dumb, they don't even know that Solyndra was one part of a much bigger program that is now not only proliferating the spread of clean energy, but making money.

I don't call them climate change deniers, I just call them ****ing idiots.

Edited December 19, 2015 by Chicog

[up2u2]

The hard core rusted on Climate Deniers can cling to that little glimmer of hope that nothing will be done on GW / CC. The science has now moved on. The Climate Denial had no impact on the conference and the politics has moved on also.

What finally beat the Deniers is the people actually seeing the changes in Climates around the world and the extreme weather events beginning to occur and the Climate Denier 'echo chamber' became just plain foolish. Also politicians become aware of the cost of doing nothing when they looked at the bill for just a slight increase in extreme weather events. Another key driver is politicians now understand that there is great wealth and new tech industries and jobs in Clean Energy.

Also the majority of people are much more educated on the issue so it is becoming more difficult for Deniers to fool people. They just simply know that the Deniers pseudo science is clap trap and tend to ignore it and they know it is being generated from the Fossil Fuel industry.

A scientific consensus on GW / CC and now with a unanimous agreement a political consensus on GW / CC.

Happy days

The so called deniers are not denying anything about true climate change, they are just fed up with the exaggerations being proffered in the attempt to jusify the untruths that are being used in an attempt to scare people into being believers. Anyone who thinks rationally knows that pollution exists, that it isn't CO2 but whaat does exist should be curtailed but nothing will happen through wealth redistribution, except that more corrupt politicians and scammers will get their snouts in the trough. But according to the believers, money changing hands can control mother nature and alter tempertures. Please show me how and do not resort to the climate change bible that so many of you turn to in times of need.

Answer this please. If scientists, not associated with the believers, are unable to predict weather occurrences, with accuracy, two or three weeks in advance, how are those on the believers side able to predict what will occur in 20, 30 or 50 years time. I know,Super Scientists paid by those who need to have this scaremongering continue. I won't be around when these so called predictions allegedly come to fruition, neither will most on here. Is it because they do so as one will never know and they cannot bre called to task for their BS predictions. The many lies put out by the so called professor Tim Flanery, the Australian Climate Change Commissioner and the billions of dollars he has cost the taxpayers should be enough to see him hung, drawn and quarted but no, this liar just goes o to make millions more through out and falsehoods.

So there is the scientific consensus and an unanimous agreement, really? Another line from the book of exaggerations that is being used to justify the alarmists point of view. So the views of over 1000 dissenting sceintists have no relevance to the debate and, according to some, is only propoganda from the fossil fuel industry that is being used to justify their argument. So what is the so called evidence presented by the alarmists called, the gospel as spoken by Al Gore, his climate crediting huckstering partner, David Blood, formerly of Goldman Sachs and the Canadian Billionaire, Jeffrey Skolls. And I suppose the other billionaires are now getting involved because they too believe the hype. I'd say they have looked at this as new way of adding to their bottom line, while all the suckers pay. Remember, they didn't get rich by giving things away, not unless there was a huge return in the offering.

So it's happy days is it, I'd suggest that you and the others stop hyperventilating, just think of the amount of CO2 you contibuting in doing so. Oh but wait, if you pay your dollar to erase your carbon footprint, then everything is ok. Now, before you escalate your joy into a full state of euphoria just sit back, take a deep breath and remember that this agreement is not legally binding unless joined by a minimum of 55 countries that allegedly represent 55 percent of green house gas emissions. Such parties will need to sign the agreement in New York between 22 April 2016 and 21 April 2017, and also adopt it within their own legal systems.

Let's all wait and see, there is over 2 years before you can even imagine gloating so don't jump the gun bu thent given their past records, there will be further talkfests, a lot more hot air and for what, so a few selected will benefit while plebs like you will be short changed in order to fill their coffers. Happy days for who, not you, I can assure you of that.

"So the views of over 1000 dissenting sceintists (sic) have no relevance to the debate......"

Compared to 33,330 scientists that confirm Anthropogenic Global Warming. Correct the 1000 are not relevant. The consensus is too high. Case dismissed.

Happy days.

[chuckd]

<<snip>>

"So the views of over 1000 dissenting sceintists (sic) have no relevance to the debate......"

Compared to 33,330 scientists that confirm Anthropogenic Global Warming. Correct the 1000 are not relevant. The consensus is too high. Case dismissed.

Happy days.

Link to the numbers please.

[Chicog]

<<snip>>

"So the views of over 1000 dissenting sceintists (sic) have no relevance to the debate......"

Compared to 33,330 scientists that confirm Anthropogenic Global Warming. Correct the 1000 are not relevant. The consensus is too high. Case dismissed.

Happy days.

Link to the numbers please.

Yeah, I'd like a link to the 1,000 to see how many of them are on the oil company payroll.

[RickBradford]

Link to the numbers please

I think our innumerate friend is making a lame effort to introduce the "97% consensus" into the figures. i.e. if 1000 scientists represent 3%, then the 97% must mean 33,330.

This labored and idiotic effort is so far from the facts as to be laughable. The 97% consensus was actually calculated as 75 out of 77 scientists whose views were taken into consideration. If you don't believe me, read the original Doran & Zimmerman paper from 2009. I'll even give you the link to ignore.: http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf

The questions were hardly earth-shattering, either:

Q1: “When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?” 76 of 79 (96.2%) answered “risen.”

Q2: “Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?” 75 of 77 (97.4%) answered “yes.”

That's all it was. Nothing about dangerous temperature rises, or CO2, or need for urgent action. Simply a minute sample of scientists answering two anodyne questions. I agree with the 96% and the 97% -- I can't imagine who the three people were who can't read a thermometer and see that temperatures have risen marginally since 1800.

Still, the activists of the hard-core Green/Left have persuaded millions of innumerate dim bulbs that this is some kind of important finding. And that is the mentality which is driving global warming hysteria.