UN: delegates set to sign historic climate change deal

[snoop1130]

UN: delegates set to sign historic climate change deal

Delegates from more than 165 states are at the United Nations in New York to sign an historic deal to slow down climate change.

It comes four months after the agreement was made at COP 21 in Paris.

A signature from all the states represented will break the record for the most countries to endorse a UN international accord on day one.

Many nations still need to hold a parliamentary vote to formally ratify the pact. To enter into force, it needs the approval of 55 percent of states.

Earth Day

The signing, which coincides with Earth Day, commits the world’s largest economies to keeping temperature rises below two degrees and to maintaining them as close as possible to 1.5 degrees.

-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-04-22

[eliotness]

Mankind can destroy the earth we live on, with pollution ( I do not believe CO2 is a pollutant, rather it is a prerequisite for life on earth ) and deforestation, but can mankind save the planet ? Not with BS, extra taxes, lies and a population estimated to rise to over 12 billion by 2100. This all about politicians joining a very lucrative club, with lots of jollies in expensive resorts around the world, with the poor dumb taxpayers funding the bill, pure and simple !!! ?

[lungnorm]

Just how do they expect to slow the imaginary warming rate? More money more meetings? Never before in the history of the human race has there been so many idiots clumped together in one place. If they really wanted to do something for the planet earth they should get tough on the Asian countries burning off crop stubble and creating the haze that covers vast areas every year. This would make more sense. Maybe after they all sign this so called deal to slow climate warming they could start a new agreement to stop all volcanoe's errupting and creating more damage to the climate than CO2 ever does. Maybe they should go back to school and study just what CO2 does. It supports life and has absolutely nothing to do with climate change. Really stupid politicians, maybe they can start WW111 as it seems they are so stupid its quite on the cards.

[up2u2]

Just how do they expect to slow the imaginary warming rate? More money more meetings? Never before in the history of the human race has there been so many idiots clumped together in one place. If they really wanted to do something for the planet earth they should get tough on the Asian countries burning off crop stubble and creating the haze that covers vast areas every year. This would make more sense. Maybe after they all sign this so called deal to slow climate warming they could start a new agreement to stop all volcanoe's errupting and creating more damage to the climate than CO2 ever does. Maybe they should go back to school and study just what CO2 does. It supports life and has absolutely nothing to do with climate change. Really stupid politicians, maybe they can start WW111 as it seems they are so stupid its quite on the cards.

Volcanoes cause Global cooling not warming. They emit trillions of tons of aerosol particulates into the upper Troposphere that reflect sunlight back into space. Burning of crops stubble produces particulate matter into the lower sea level atmosphere (where we breath). Nothing really to do with CO2 levels and is regional so requires a regional solution not a Global Solution. Maybe you need to go back to school. CO2 is one of the Greenhouse gasses that contribute an increase in Earth's temperature by +30⁰c without it we freeze solid with too much it becomes a pollutant and elevates Earth's temperatures where most of the human race would not survive. Although CO2 is a key element in plant photosynthesis Earth's vegetation can only absorb natural occurring CO2 plus a small proportion of man made CO2. CO2 introduced by man burning Fossil Fuels is easily identifiable and quantifiable as it has a different Carbon14 Isotope attached.

It would seem the stupid politicians may have a better grasp of the actual basic science on Global Warming / Climate Change than you appear to demonstrate.

[arjunadawn]

A previous poster leaves out 50% of a known observation: Volcanism both enables warming and cooling, due to the complex nature of particulates. Its simple science, and relatively proven. Its not a matter of opinion. Volcanoes do both but account, in the long run, for a considerable local source of climate (following solar/earth/interactions).

However, this is an historical deal. This deal moves us one step further into the hybrid modern form of government that will eventually become a horrible caricature of our post-enlightenment world. It cannot be otherwise when so much is predicated on outright lies! It can only have this result when climate change is the vehicle but not the goal.

These pacts are a by-product of hijacking of reason/science; insinuated into our collective psyche and polity by fear. "Climate Change" = Political ideology, plain and simple. Even the defenders of climate change efforts note with a sigh the absurd side roads, postponements, and diversions into the political. "Climate Change" is an ideology. It is designed to insidiously replace economies and government structures with supranational treaties and obligations without the consent of the governed, under the premise of fear and the "sky is falling." If one removes all the science and considers what is left standing, it is a who's who of socialists, reds, progressives, and elites. The mind exercise alone should sound alarms.

What is most regrettable is that there are pressing needs to act like real stewards for this planet, currently being wasted away. Look for rocks from space. Stop the damn pollution. Stop putting fluoride in water. Stop mixing mercury with vaccines... etc, ad infinitum. STOP LYING! Whatever it is, take that damn supranational "Climate Change" Ideology BS and...

Even where I disagree with those in the Climate Change community about the validity of their ostensible purpose, many founders now agree with me on this: "Climate Change" is an (radical) ideology, regardless of what it was originally intended to address. The father of genuine climate concern calls such deals "B***it!" I can hardly be off the mark.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/21/earth-day-paris-united-nations-weather-channel-editorials-debates/83349848/

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/

http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/father-of-global-warming-changes-his-mind-says-doomsday-scenario-not-likely

[RickBradford]

The signatures on this document are going to do precisely nothing to the way that climate changes going forward.

Just like the useless Kyoto Protocol of 1997, this is simply an orgy of virtue signalling organised by the UN.

[boomerangutang]

Interesting that most posters herein twist their minds into trying to find as much negativity with the deal as possible, ....and then some more negativity based on faulty science.

It sounds like all the deniers should find solace residing in inner cities, with plenty of gridlock, smog, dirty water, itchy eyes. I had a buddy who worked in Bangkok. He had to leave. He wasn't a tree-hugger. He actually chain-smoked cigs. But he said that ever day, after traveling to and from work in Bkk, he had to use wipes to wipe black grime off his face. That's the sort of world the deniers seem to relish. Maybe they work in the handi-wipe industry. Or affiliated with a biz that makes air filter masks, or some career related to fossil fuels. 'fess up.

[arjunadawn]

Most posters here do find negativity in the deal. Its a bad deal, forming bad foundation, and working toward a bad end. Observing that there are dubious cabals with mercenary motives does not twist their thinking. It reflects two things: 1. this small sampling shows posters viscerally reject the ideology of "Climate Change" and 2, they also retain their independent reason.

When anyone engages in any public space posting or debating and uses words like "denier" etc., they should realize immediately what type of discourse they deal with. Return to logic 101 and Argument. Ad hominen, however veiled, will reveal the deficit of the poster every time. "Denier" is a pejorative; its used solely to impugn a person. A poster cannot use this device and also disown it. It is a personal attack, no more.

A "denier," apparently, is a person who retains their own cognitive apparatus and rational faculties independently of those in the Wheel Room- they think for themselves. If called a "denier," recognize your charge is thought crime, not drinking the cool aid, not following the herd. Deniers, then, are the Billie Hayes of Climate Change! Good for them/us. Denier=Bad Machine

Note; Pollution and climate change or not the same thing. Invariably, "climate change-ists" would conflate the two, but they are not synonymous.

[stillbornagain]

A previous poster leaves out 50% of a known observation: Volcanism both enables warming and cooling, due to the complex nature of particulates. Its simple science, and relatively proven. Its not a matter of opinion. Volcanoes do both but account, in the long run, for a considerable local source of climate (following solar/earth/interactions).

However, this is an historical deal. This deal moves us one step further into the hybrid modern form of government that will eventually become a horrible caricature of our post-enlightenment world. It cannot be otherwise when so much is predicated on outright lies! It can only have this result when climate change is the vehicle but not the goal.

These pacts are a by-product of hijacking of reason/science; insinuated into our collective psyche and polity by fear. "Climate Change" = Political ideology, plain and simple. Even the defenders of climate change efforts note with a sigh the absurd side roads, postponements, and diversions into the political. "Climate Change" is an ideology. It is designed to insidiously replace economies and government structures with supranational treaties and obligations without the consent of the governed, under the premise of fear and the "sky is falling." If one removes all the science and considers what is left standing, it is a who's who of socialists, reds, progressives, and elites. The mind exercise alone should sound alarms.

What is most regrettable is that there are pressing needs to act like real stewards for this planet, currently being wasted away. Look for rocks from space. Stop the damn pollution. Stop putting fluoride in water. Stop mixing mercury with vaccines... etc, ad infinitum. STOP LYING! Whatever it is, take that damn supranational "Climate Change" Ideology BS and...

Even where I disagree with those in the Climate Change community about the validity of their ostensible purpose, many founders now agree with me on this: "Climate Change" is an (radical) ideology, regardless of what it was originally intended to address. The father of genuine climate concern calls such deals "B***it!" I can hardly be off the mark.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/21/earth-day-paris-united-nations-weather-channel-editorials-debates/83349848/

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/

http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/father-of-global-warming-changes-his-mind-says-doomsday-scenario-not-likely

So glad you cited wattsupwiththat.com If ever there was a dishonest "journalist" it's Anthony Watts. As you probably don't know, there is an eminent physicist named Richard Muller. Like many climate change deniers he asserted that scientist who maintained the truth of climate change hadn't taken a very important factor into account: namely that the results from many of the temperature stations they were using were tainted because of the urban heat island effect and other faults Climate scientists maintained they had fully accounted for it. Watts got wind of this and with his benefactors at the Heartland Institue (funded by the Koch Brothers) financed Muller to assemble a dream team of scientists to rescrutinize the result. And what do you think the results were? Muller found that his results exactly confirmed what climate scientist were saying. They had fully accounted for any problems with the stations. In other words, the global temperature increase was real. As for Muller..he's just disappeared from climate change deniers' conversations. It's like he never was.

[up2u2]

So glad you cited wattsupwiththat.com If ever there was a dishonest "journalist" it's Anthony Watts. As you probably don't know, there is an eminent physicist named Richard Muller. Like many climate change deniers he asserted that scientist who maintained the truth of climate change hadn't taken a very important factor into account: namely that the results from many of the temperature stations they were using were tainted because of the urban heat island effect and other faults Climate scientists maintained they had fully accounted for it. Watts got wind of this and with his benefactors at the Heartland Institue (funded by the Koch Brothers) financed Muller to assemble a dream team of scientists to rescrutinize the result. And what do you think the results were? Muller found that his results exactly confirmed what climate scientist were saying. They had fully accounted for any problems with the stations. In other words, the global temperature increase was real. As for Muller..he's just disappeared from climate change deniers' conversations. It's like he never was.

Correct Richard Muller set up the Berkeley Earth Science Temperature (BEST) project. The project was set up to prove that the science on GW was wrong. It was funded by Heartland Institute and Koch Bros. et al. After two years Muller announced the temperature figures where indeed accurate and that it was caused by burning of Fossil Fuels. Today Berkeley Earth is one of the leading independent laboratories for Global temperature analysis in the world.

[up2u2]

A previous poster leaves out 50% of a known observation: Volcanism both enables warming and cooling, due to the complex nature of particulates. Its simple science, and relatively proven. Its not a matter of opinion. Volcanoes do both but account, in the long run, for a considerable local source of climate (following solar/earth/interactions).

However, this is an historical deal. This deal moves us one step further into the hybrid modern form of government that will eventually become a horrible caricature of our post-enlightenment world. It cannot be otherwise when so much is predicated on outright lies! It can only have this result when climate change is the vehicle but not the goal.

These pacts are a by-product of hijacking of reason/science; insinuated into our collective psyche and polity by fear. "Climate Change" = Political ideology, plain and simple. Even the defenders of climate change efforts note with a sigh the absurd side roads, postponements, and diversions into the political. "Climate Change" is an ideology. It is designed to insidiously replace economies and government structures with supranational treaties and obligations without the consent of the governed, under the premise of fear and the "sky is falling." If one removes all the science and considers what is left standing, it is a who's who of socialists, reds, progressives, and elites. The mind exercise alone should sound alarms.

What is most regrettable is that there are pressing needs to act like real stewards for this planet, currently being wasted away. Look for rocks from space. Stop the damn pollution. Stop putting fluoride in water. Stop mixing mercury with vaccines... etc, ad infinitum. STOP LYING! Whatever it is, take that damn supranational "Climate Change" Ideology BS and...

Even where I disagree with those in the Climate Change community about the validity of their ostensible purpose, many founders now agree with me on this: "Climate Change" is an (radical) ideology, regardless of what it was originally intended to address. The father of genuine climate concern calls such deals "B***it!" I can hardly be off the mark.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/21/earth-day-paris-united-nations-weather-channel-editorials-debates/83349848/

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/

http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/father-of-global-warming-changes-his-mind-says-doomsday-scenario-not-likely

There is always going to be a small minority of people swayed by self interested propaganda. This type of misinformation strategy occurred with Tobacco and cancer, lead in paint, Ozone depletion etc. In the end the scientific evidence wins out. This has been a hard fought issue as the sheer wealth of the Fossil Fuel polluters and their ability to disseminate misinformation and propaganda and bribe / threaten governments they fund. The UN 'historic climate change deal' puts an end to all that. The course ahead is set.

The Fossil Fuel polluters themselves did not believe GW / CC was a hoax they knew quite well it was an eminent threat they simply wanted to stall the process of transition to clean energy for as long as they could and protect their profits. They have been very successful over the last 25 years. The sad thing really is the world could be a lot further down the track in addressing Fossil Fuel pollution. A lot of valuable time has been wasted.

What fascinates me is the small minority of people who embrace misinformation and self interested propaganda and are drawn to it like moths to a flame. When ALL the evidence is pointing in one direction one Fossil Fuel funded blogsite brings any semblance of rational thinking crashing down.

This agreement marks the beginning of a new and exciting future as clean energy Corporations are formed new technologies creating thousands of billionaires. There is no end to where this new direction will take us. A cleaner more sustainable planet will just be a small by-product. Polluting Fossil Fuel producers will reinvent themselves or fall by the wayside. Their supporters and promoters of their propaganda can please themselves.

[arjunadawn]

A previous poster leaves out 50% of a known observation: Volcanism both enables warming and cooling, due to the complex nature of particulates. Its simple science, and relatively proven. Its not a matter of opinion. Volcanoes do both but account, in the long run, for a considerable local source of climate (following solar/earth/interactions).

However, this is an historical deal. This deal moves us one step further into the hybrid modern form of government that will eventually become a horrible caricature of our post-enlightenment world. It cannot be otherwise when so much is predicated on outright lies! It can only have this result when climate change is the vehicle but not the goal.

These pacts are a by-product of hijacking of reason/science; insinuated into our collective psyche and polity by fear. "Climate Change" = Political ideology, plain and simple. Even the defenders of climate change efforts note with a sigh the absurd side roads, postponements, and diversions into the political. "Climate Change" is an ideology. It is designed to insidiously replace economies and government structures with supranational treaties and obligations without the consent of the governed, under the premise of fear and the "sky is falling." If one removes all the science and considers what is left standing, it is a who's who of socialists, reds, progressives, and elites. The mind exercise alone should sound alarms.

What is most regrettable is that there are pressing needs to act like real stewards for this planet, currently being wasted away. Look for rocks from space. Stop the damn pollution. Stop putting fluoride in water. Stop mixing mercury with vaccines... etc, ad infinitum. STOP LYING! Whatever it is, take that damn supranational "Climate Change" Ideology BS and...

Even where I disagree with those in the Climate Change community about the validity of their ostensible purpose, many founders now agree with me on this: "Climate Change" is an (radical) ideology, regardless of what it was originally intended to address. The father of genuine climate concern calls such deals "B***it!" I can hardly be off the mark.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/21/earth-day-paris-united-nations-weather-channel-editorials-debates/83349848/

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/

http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/father-of-global-warming-changes-his-mind-says-doomsday-scenario-not-likely

So glad you cited wattsupwiththat.com If ever there was a dishonest "journalist" it's Anthony Watts. As you probably don't know, there is an eminent physicist named Richard Muller. Like many climate change deniers he asserted that scientist who maintained the truth of climate change hadn't taken a very important factor into account: namely that the results from many of the temperature stations they were using were tainted because of the urban heat island effect and other faults Climate scientists maintained they had fully accounted for it. Watts got wind of this and with his benefactors at the Heartland Institue (funded by the Koch Brothers) financed Muller to assemble a dream team of scientists to rescrutinize the result. And what do you think the results were? Muller found that his results exactly confirmed what climate scientist were saying. They had fully accounted for any problems with the stations. In other words, the global temperature increase was real. As for Muller..he's just disappeared from climate change deniers' conversations. It's like he never was.

Never heard of wattsupwiththat, and doubt I would visit. A stickler for quotations, I would hardly use another's work without citing it. That you used "denier" rendered the remainder of your post... well, unread.

[arjunadawn]

A previous poster leaves out 50% of a known observation: Volcanism both enables warming and cooling, due to the complex nature of particulates. Its simple science, and relatively proven. Its not a matter of opinion. Volcanoes do both but account, in the long run, for a considerable local source of climate (following solar/earth/interactions).

However, this is an historical deal. This deal moves us one step further into the hybrid modern form of government that will eventually become a horrible caricature of our post-enlightenment world. It cannot be otherwise when so much is predicated on outright lies! It can only have this result when climate change is the vehicle but not the goal.

These pacts are a by-product of hijacking of reason/science; insinuated into our collective psyche and polity by fear. "Climate Change" = Political ideology, plain and simple. Even the defenders of climate change efforts note with a sigh the absurd side roads, postponements, and diversions into the political. "Climate Change" is an ideology. It is designed to insidiously replace economies and government structures with supranational treaties and obligations without the consent of the governed, under the premise of fear and the "sky is falling." If one removes all the science and considers what is left standing, it is a who's who of socialists, reds, progressives, and elites. The mind exercise alone should sound alarms.

What is most regrettable is that there are pressing needs to act like real stewards for this planet, currently being wasted away. Look for rocks from space. Stop the damn pollution. Stop putting fluoride in water. Stop mixing mercury with vaccines... etc, ad infinitum. STOP LYING! Whatever it is, take that damn supranational "Climate Change" Ideology BS and...

Even where I disagree with those in the Climate Change community about the validity of their ostensible purpose, many founders now agree with me on this: "Climate Change" is an (radical) ideology, regardless of what it was originally intended to address. The father of genuine climate concern calls such deals "B***it!" I can hardly be off the mark.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/21/earth-day-paris-united-nations-weather-channel-editorials-debates/83349848/

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/

http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/father-of-global-warming-changes-his-mind-says-doomsday-scenario-not-likely

There is always going to be a small minority of people swayed by self interested propaganda. This type of misinformation strategy occurred with Tobacco and cancer, lead in paint, Ozone depletion etc. In the end the scientific evidence wins out. This has been a hard fought issue as the sheer wealth of the Fossil Fuel polluters and their ability to disseminate misinformation and propaganda and bribe / threaten governments they fund. The UN 'historic climate change deal' puts an end to all that. The course ahead is set.

The Fossil Fuel polluters themselves did not believe GW / CC was a hoax they knew quite well it was an eminent threat they simply wanted to stall the process of transition to clean energy for as long as they could and protect their profits. They have been very successful over the last 25 years. The sad thing really is the world could be a lot further down the track in addressing Fossil Fuel pollution. A lot of valuable time has been wasted.

What fascinates me is the small minority of people who embrace misinformation and self interested propaganda and are drawn to it like moths to a flame. When ALL the evidence is pointing in one direction one Fossil Fuel funded blogsite brings any semblance of rational thinking crashing down.

This agreement marks the beginning of a new and exciting future as clean energy Corporations are formed new technologies creating thousands of billionaires. There is no end to where this new direction will take us. A cleaner more sustainable planet will just be a small by-product. Polluting Fossil Fuel producers will reinvent themselves or fall by the wayside. Their supporters and promoters of their propaganda can please themselves.

Thank you for this response. I disagree with your conclusion but applaud your delivery. Really. As an aside, I think the fossil fuel industry is about as corrupt as any mafia. I cannot calculate the harm they do to the planet, their gross suppression of alternative energy sources, and the stranglehold they have on global politics... and war. I support most efforts to curb pollution. As much as I detest their poor stewardship I would caution that the entire modern world is built upon petro derivatives, let alone its energy uses. When/if success arrives, and the fossil fuel people are homeless, everyone else will be also.

"All the evidence" does not point to the conclusion climate change[rs] posit. Indeed, "all the[ir] information" is specially culled and manipulated to harvest their "Climate Change" argument; it still does not even achieve their goal. "All of the information" excludes "all" the largest contributors of climate change, and these are solar, galactic, and electromagnetic factors. In the end many like me would be more malleable if it were not for the politics that so obviously motivate the entire debacle. Still, thank you for your fair comments above.

[eliotness]

There is no doubt that man has harmed the planet's ecosystems with pollution (land, water and air), landscape changes, deforestation, over grazing, over fishing etc etc, but yet everyone, especially politicians, ignores "the elephant in the room" over population. All the aforementioned problems stem from this unsustainable fact. Soon the fight for land, food and water will become the overwhelming issue.

[pitrevie]

A previous poster leaves out 50% of a known observation: Volcanism both enables warming and cooling, due to the complex nature of particulates. Its simple science, and relatively proven. Its not a matter of opinion. Volcanoes do both but account, in the long run, for a considerable local source of climate (following solar/earth/interactions).

However, this is an historical deal. This deal moves us one step further into the hybrid modern form of government that will eventually become a horrible caricature of our post-enlightenment world. It cannot be otherwise when so much is predicated on outright lies! It can only have this result when climate change is the vehicle but not the goal.

These pacts are a by-product of hijacking of reason/science; insinuated into our collective psyche and polity by fear. "Climate Change" = Political ideology, plain and simple. Even the defenders of climate change efforts note with a sigh the absurd side roads, postponements, and diversions into the political. "Climate Change" is an ideology. It is designed to insidiously replace economies and government structures with supranational treaties and obligations without the consent of the governed, under the premise of fear and the "sky is falling." If one removes all the science and considers what is left standing, it is a who's who of socialists, reds, progressives, and elites. The mind exercise alone should sound alarms.

What is most regrettable is that there are pressing needs to act like real stewards for this planet, currently being wasted away. Look for rocks from space. Stop the damn pollution. Stop putting fluoride in water. Stop mixing mercury with vaccines... etc, ad infinitum. STOP LYING! Whatever it is, take that damn supranational "Climate Change" Ideology BS and...

Even where I disagree with those in the Climate Change community about the validity of their ostensible purpose, many founders now agree with me on this: "Climate Change" is an (radical) ideology, regardless of what it was originally intended to address. The father of genuine climate concern calls such deals "B***it!" I can hardly be off the mark.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/21/earth-day-paris-united-nations-weather-channel-editorials-debates/83349848/

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/

http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/father-of-global-warming-changes-his-mind-says-doomsday-scenario-not-likely

So glad you cited wattsupwiththat.com If ever there was a dishonest "journalist" it's Anthony Watts. As you probably don't know, there is an eminent physicist named Richard Muller. Like many climate change deniers he asserted that scientist who maintained the truth of climate change hadn't taken a very important factor into account: namely that the results from many of the temperature stations they were using were tainted because of the urban heat island effect and other faults Climate scientists maintained they had fully accounted for it. Watts got wind of this and with his benefactors at the Heartland Institue (funded by the Koch Brothers) financed Muller to assemble a dream team of scientists to rescrutinize the result. And what do you think the results were? Muller found that his results exactly confirmed what climate scientist were saying. They had fully accounted for any problems with the stations. In other words, the global temperature increase was real. As for Muller..he's just disappeared from climate change deniers' conversations. It's like he never was.

Totally agree and as you say whenever you mention his name or his research its dismissed but usually ignored, people just don't want to know, Not surprisingly to the mainstream community, he came up with the same answer as all other groups over the last 40 years. The planet is warming, and the only plausible explanation is increased greenhouse gases." All that people have to do is read the scientific papers not listen to some over enthusiastic campaigner on some obscure TV program and then cite that as evidence against climate change. Even the Pentagon is now factoring climate change into its forward planning.

[up2u2]

There is always going to be a small minority of people swayed by self interested propaganda. This type of misinformation strategy occurred with Tobacco and cancer, lead in paint, Ozone depletion etc. In the end the scientific evidence wins out. This has been a hard fought issue as the sheer wealth of the Fossil Fuel polluters and their ability to disseminate misinformation and propaganda and bribe / threaten governments they fund. The UN 'historic climate change deal' puts an end to all that. The course ahead is set.

The Fossil Fuel polluters themselves did not believe GW / CC was a hoax they knew quite well it was an eminent threat they simply wanted to stall the process of transition to clean energy for as long as they could and protect their profits. They have been very successful over the last 25 years. The sad thing really is the world could be a lot further down the track in addressing Fossil Fuel pollution. A lot of valuable time has been wasted.

What fascinates me is the small minority of people who embrace misinformation and self interested propaganda and are drawn to it like moths to a flame. When ALL the evidence is pointing in one direction one Fossil Fuel funded blogsite brings any semblance of rational thinking crashing down.

This agreement marks the beginning of a new and exciting future as clean energy Corporations are formed new technologies creating thousands of billionaires. There is no end to where this new direction will take us. A cleaner more sustainable planet will just be a small by-product. Polluting Fossil Fuel producers will reinvent themselves or fall by the wayside. Their supporters and promoters of their propaganda can please themselves.

Thank you for this response. I disagree with your conclusion but applaud your delivery. Really. As an aside, I think the fossil fuel industry is about as corrupt as any mafia. I cannot calculate the harm they do to the planet, their gross suppression of alternative energy sources, and the stranglehold they have on global politics... and war. I support most efforts to curb pollution. As much as I detest their poor stewardship I would caution that the entire modern world is built upon petro derivatives, let alone its energy uses. When/if success arrives, and the fossil fuel people are homeless, everyone else will be also.

"All the evidence" does not point to the conclusion climate change[rs] posit. Indeed, "all the[ir] information" is specially culled and manipulated to harvest their "Climate Change" argument; it still does not even achieve their goal. "All of the information" excludes "all" the largest contributors of climate change, and these are solar, galactic, and electromagnetic factors. In the end many like me would be more malleable if it were not for the politics that so obviously motivate the entire debacle. Still, thank you for your fair comments above.

Unfortunately for you it does. No scientific evidence supports your view.

[boomerangutang]

Most posters here do find negativity in the deal. Its a bad deal, forming bad foundation, and working toward a bad end. Observing that there are dubious cabals with mercenary motives does not twist their thinking. It reflects two things: 1. this small sampling shows posters viscerally reject the ideology of "Climate Change" and 2, they also retain their independent reason.

When anyone engages in any public space posting or debating and uses words like "denier" etc., they should realize immediately what type of discourse they deal with. Return to logic 101 and Argument. Ad hominen, however veiled, will reveal the deficit of the poster every time. "Denier" is a pejorative; its used solely to impugn a person. A poster cannot use this device and also disown it. It is a personal attack, no more.

A "denier," apparently, is a person who retains their own cognitive apparatus and rational faculties independently of those in the Wheel Room- they think for themselves. If called a "denier," recognize your charge is thought crime, not drinking the cool aid, not following the herd. Deniers, then, are the Billie Hayes of Climate Change! Good for them/us. Denier=Bad Machine

Note; Pollution and climate change or not the same thing. Invariably, "climate change-ists" would conflate the two, but they are not synonymous.

Pollution and climate change are related. Man-made pollution, mostly fossil fuel emissions do contribute to warming and the problems which ensue. It's like saying lead-based paint is not the same as mental problems in kids. Yes, they're not the same thing, but they do relate to one another. I use the word denier because it's aimed at people who deny the findings of nearly 100% of scientists who study climate-related issues.

What if 97% of climate scientists are right? If they're right, which most sensible people think they are, then continued devil-may-care burning of fossil fuels will contribute to increased desertification, higher sea levels, water fights, and lung disease. Deniers have fixated their minds to thinking they're all wrong, and people should therefore continue business as usual.

There is no doubt that man has harmed the planet's ecosystems with pollution (land, water and air), landscape changes, deforestation, over grazing, over fishing etc etc, but yet everyone, especially politicians, ignores "the elephant in the room" over population. All the aforementioned problems stem from this unsustainable fact. Soon the fight for land, food and water will become the overwhelming issue.

You're right, and it's what I've been putting forth for many years. I even did my little part by getting my tubes tied 25 yrs ago. If I hadn't, it's likely I'd have about 20 mini-me's walking around now, each contributing over a ton of CO2 to the atmosphere, as well as several p.u. truck fulls of garbage/annually.

As a side note: Remember when Reggae became mega popular in the US, during the 70's and 80's ? Did you know that when those reggae bands toured the US and Europe, they boomed boomed thousands of cute little groupy gals? How often did they use condoms? Never. How many of the thousands of babies they made are they taking responsibility for? None. Just one bass player from one reggae band has nearly 80 paternity suits from ex-groupies. Overpopulation takes many forms and has many repercussions. It's not a political issue now, but it will have to be - in coming decades.

[shirtless]

This is going to do nothing, accept cost 1st world countries , will asians stop burning off hell no , will oil companies act responsibly hell no will the UN stop flying to meetings no, will cars be banned no i cant see any real changes because of the bottom line to big business. we all know by now democracy really is dead.

[up2u2]

So glad you cited wattsupwiththat.com If ever there was a dishonest "journalist" it's Anthony Watts. As you probably don't know, there is an eminent physicist named Richard Muller. Like many climate change deniers he asserted that scientist who maintained the truth of climate change hadn't taken a very important factor into account: namely that the results from many of the temperature stations they were using were tainted because of the urban heat island effect and other faults Climate scientists maintained they had fully accounted for it. Watts got wind of this and with his benefactors at the Heartland Institue (funded by the Koch Brothers) financed Muller to assemble a dream team of scientists to rescrutinize the result. And what do you think the results were? Muller found that his results exactly confirmed what climate scientist were saying. They had fully accounted for any problems with the stations. In other words, the global temperature increase was real. As for Muller..he's just disappeared from climate change deniers' conversations. It's like he never was.

Never heard of wattsupwiththat, and doubt I would visit. A stickler for quotations, I would hardly use another's work without citing it. That you used "denier" rendered the remainder of your post... well, unread.

Anthony Watts Fossil Fuel funded Climate Denial blogsite is chock full of propaganda and non scientific drivel. Big Big red flag on the credibility of anyone who cites Anthony Watts to support their view. He has no academic credentials has never been involved in scientific research has never produced a peer reviewed scientific Paper or Article. The closest he got to science was as a weather report reader on a country radio station.

Richard Muller had the same view as you and set out to scientifically prove GW / CC wrong. He failed. He is very well respected. Once he proved without a doubt he was wrong he put his hand up and now runs Berkeley Earth with his daughter. Berkeley Earth dot Org is the only independently funded global temperature analysis laboratory in the world.

Always a little too much focus on surface temperatures. Only 3% of the excess heat generated by CO₂ pollution remains in the atmosphere 97% is absorbed into the Oceans. Global Warming science has been around for a long long time. Svante Arrhenius flagged it in 1896 some 120 years ago. He was the first to link CO₂ emitted by the burning of Fossil Fuels with the potential of raising global temperatures. It was always thought that the Oceans were such a huge heat sink that it would never cause any real concern. Kind of got that bit wrong and we went a little crazy burning trillions upon trillions of tons of stored hydrocarbons.

[stillbornagain]

A previous poster leaves out 50% of a known observation: Volcanism both enables warming and cooling, due to the complex nature of particulates. Its simple science, and relatively proven. Its not a matter of opinion. Volcanoes do both but account, in the long run, for a considerable local source of climate (following solar/earth/interactions).

However, this is an historical deal. This deal moves us one step further into the hybrid modern form of government that will eventually become a horrible caricature of our post-enlightenment world. It cannot be otherwise when so much is predicated on outright lies! It can only have this result when climate change is the vehicle but not the goal.

These pacts are a by-product of hijacking of reason/science; insinuated into our collective psyche and polity by fear. "Climate Change" = Political ideology, plain and simple. Even the defenders of climate change efforts note with a sigh the absurd side roads, postponements, and diversions into the political. "Climate Change" is an ideology. It is designed to insidiously replace economies and government structures with supranational treaties and obligations without the consent of the governed, under the premise of fear and the "sky is falling." If one removes all the science and considers what is left standing, it is a who's who of socialists, reds, progressives, and elites. The mind exercise alone should sound alarms.

What is most regrettable is that there are pressing needs to act like real stewards for this planet, currently being wasted away. Look for rocks from space. Stop the damn pollution. Stop putting fluoride in water. Stop mixing mercury with vaccines... etc, ad infinitum. STOP LYING! Whatever it is, take that damn supranational "Climate Change" Ideology BS and...

Even where I disagree with those in the Climate Change community about the validity of their ostensible purpose, many founders now agree with me on this: "Climate Change" is an (radical) ideology, regardless of what it was originally intended to address. The father of genuine climate concern calls such deals "B***it!" I can hardly be off the mark.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/21/earth-day-paris-united-nations-weather-channel-editorials-debates/83349848/

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/

http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/father-of-global-warming-changes-his-mind-says-doomsday-scenario-not-likely

So glad you cited wattsupwiththat.com If ever there was a dishonest "journalist" it's Anthony Watts. As you probably don't know, there is an eminent physicist named Richard Muller. Like many climate change deniers he asserted that scientist who maintained the truth of climate change hadn't taken a very important factor into account: namely that the results from many of the temperature stations they were using were tainted because of the urban heat island effect and other faults Climate scientists maintained they had fully accounted for it. Watts got wind of this and with his benefactors at the Heartland Institue (funded by the Koch Brothers) financed Muller to assemble a dream team of scientists to rescrutinize the result. And what do you think the results were? Muller found that his results exactly confirmed what climate scientist were saying. They had fully accounted for any problems with the stations. In other words, the global temperature increase was real. As for Muller..he's just disappeared from climate change deniers' conversations. It's like he never was.

Never heard of wattsupwiththat, and doubt I would visit. A stickler for quotations, I would hardly use another's work without citing it. That you used "denier" rendered the remainder of your post... well, unread.

The third link in your list is this: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/

Looks like wattsupwiththat.com to me.

[up2u2]

Never heard of wattsupwiththat, and doubt I would visit. A stickler for quotations, I would hardly use another's work without citing it. That you used "denier" rendered the remainder of your post... well, unread.

The third link in your list is this: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/

Looks like wattsupwiththat.com to me.

That's what I thought SB.

I rather poke myself in the eye with a stick than cite Anthony Watts.

[boomerangutang]

This is going to do nothing, accept cost 1st world countries , will asians stop burning off hell no , will oil companies act responsibly hell no will the UN stop flying to meetings no, will cars be banned no i cant see any real changes because of the bottom line to big business. we all know by now democracy really is dead.

If a person is fixated upon finding fault, then fault can be found. I'd rather see it as the glass half full. Even if there's a small amount of lessening of burning (fields and fossil fuels including coal), then some improvement is better than no improvement - or increased polluting, isn't it?

If you look at graphs of fossil fuel use and/or field burnings, you'll see they increase decade by decade. Do deniers want more crap burnt? Reasonable people don't.

[lungnorm]

up2u2. Thanks for your response to my quickly thrown together post on this topic. All I can say is, 'up u 2'

[up2u2]

up2u2. Thanks for your response to my quickly thrown together post on this topic. All I can say is, 'up u 2'

You are welcome.

[sgtsabai]

Fossil fuel companies have known for years that there is global warming/climate change and they used propaganda to fool the gullible public for years much like the model used by big tobacco. Law suits are being brought against them for doing so. In fact many of the so-called anti-climate change "scientists" (less than 3% of all) are hired whores for the fossil fuel industry. As to the "signing" mere words on a piece of paper. There is no enforcement mechanism. I come from refinery country, I know what it does to people. Once saw a beautiful ad for how great the oil refinery was in keeping almost pristine marsh that way. Oh, marsh grass growing, egret standing in the shallow water, refinery in background, yes quite "beautiful", except I knew that marsh and that area. Pan down and it was black, black with oil. Ahem, that's not propaganda?

[eliotness]

Fossil fuel companies have known for years that there is global warming/climate change and they used propaganda to fool the gullible public for years much like the model used by big tobacco. Law suits are being brought against them for doing so. In fact many of the so-called anti-climate change "scientists" (less than 3% of all) are hired whores for the fossil fuel industry. As to the "signing" mere words on a piece of paper. There is no enforcement mechanism. I come from refinery country, I know what it does to people. Once saw a beautiful ad for how great the oil refinery was in keeping almost pristine marsh that way. Oh, marsh grass growing, egret standing in the shallow water, refinery in background, yes quite "beautiful", except I knew that marsh and that area. Pan down and it was black, black with oil. Ahem, that's not propaganda?

Got to agree with you on that last point. I cringe when I see the PR put out by the likes of BP stating how green they are.

As for the "denier" scientists being whores, there are no bigger "whores" than the politicians. After all the Western powers went to war in Iraq for oil, not because Saddam had WMDs. Politicians are pandering to the environmentally concerned, whilst taking the money off the oil companies.

[sgtsabai]

Agreed, politicians are the major problem. Here is a little "oops" for Exxon: http://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/04/13092/dci-group-subpoenaed-expanding-exxon-climate-denial-investigation

[eliotness]

Agreed, politicians are the major problem. Here is a little "oops" for Exxon: http://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/04/13092/dci-group-subpoenaed-expanding-exxon-climate-denial-investigation

That's correct, it's politicians who are THE PROBLEM. They are in a "win win" situation, they impose "green taxes" to save the planet, a tiny fraction of which is actually spent on environmental projects and in the meantime the big polluters pay big-time into their party funds. That's why I smile when the farangs talk about corruption in Thailand.

[stillbornagain]

Good News! There's a new organization of climate scientists that has begun to write detailed critiques of climate change articles. Here's the website

http://climatefeedback.org/

Spread the news.

And here's a link located in one critique to a great article in The New Scientist. It addresses the often cited falsehood that warming stopped in 1998. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14527-climate-myths-global-warming-stopped-in-1998/

What makes it even better is that it was written in 2008 and subsequent years have only reinforced the accuracy of its observations.

Edited April 26, 2016 by stillbornagain

[RickBradford]

It addresses the often cited falsehood that warming stopped in 1998.

It is not a "falsehood" -- it is an assertion backed by statistical analysis which is supported by, among others, the UK Meteorological Office.

There are many statistical analyses that can be done on temperature data since 1998 -- some ways of looking at the data show mild warming, others show no warming. No particular way is "right" or "wrong" -- that is the nature of statistics.

To go further and call it a "falsehood" is absurd and cultish.

But it exactly fits the smug Green/Left worldview: "My opinions are facts, whereas your facts are merely opinions."