The Only Global Warming Presentation You Will Ever Need

Climate Skeptics Win, Climate Alarmists Lose, and the Environment Loses

Well the results are in and it's official.

The Global Warming Alarmists have finally, finally shown themselves for what they are - a bunch of money grubbing neo-communist global governance jealous little bastards.

And this is how RATIONALISTS view global warming

I want to make one thing clear, I am a skeptic of the alarmists' political agenda, not the scientific data.

If the scientists have proven a 1°C rise in the last ten years, I accept that, if they prove a decline I accept that, if they prove the medieval warm period was more drastic than this one - I accept that too. But I have never accepted a bunch of pretentious self-righteous eco-nazis who dance around one "holy parameter" known as carbon and at the same time ostracize and witch hunt anyone who doesn't believe.

 Especially when it is my tangible money that is going to pay for their intangible solution!

So as I have said in many posts before, we have a group of spastic neo-communist and eco-nazi-nuts screaming about the environment- but in the end, all they really want is money.

Climate compensation row at Doha

And now it is naked and out in the open for all to see.

Witness the climate conference in Doha Qatar.

It has broken down into a bunch of international lawywers now worried about "how are they gonna get their money".

'Hot-air' release at Doha climate talks dispels tension

"A TRANSFER mechanism must be put in place" - 

after this request the U.S. promptly left the talks along with other super powers.

It seems the climate agenda was never really about improving the climate or reducing pollution, it was always a global governance scam.

Why else would Al Gore and his cronies at Goldmann-Sachs make up a fake critieria known as "Carbon Credit" and try to push this to the rest of the world?

Now we see the smaller states - well noted among them are states that pollute more per capita than the rest of the world - suing for COMPENSATION.

Witness the global international community literally fuck themselves....

It was never about the environment, it was always about money.

"to mobilize a fund of $100bn annually"(!!!)

Thank you Doha and all you climate alarmists - you have finally played your hand and lost.

In the words of Lord Monckton "It's off the table - it's dead".

Yup! "Climate" and "Global Warming" are dead now.

In the meantime any hopes for actually doing something about pollution just went out the window.

They bet everything on one card.

Einstein said if he had 1 hour to save the world, he would use 55 minutes on defining the problem and 5 minutes on the solution.

As I have said before, if they would have defined it as "Hey world, let's pollute less" - nobody would have had a problem with that.

Instead you got a bunch of new world order assholes like Al Gore making deals with international banksters and thinking up new carbon credit and offset schemes that only a banker could love and profit from - and only the workers and middle class could SUFFER from and... well the results are obvious:
 

Loss and damage - first articulated at the 2012 conference and in part based on the agreement that was signed at the 2010 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Cancun. It introduces the principle that countries vulnerable to the effects of climate change may be financially compensated in future by countries that fail to curb their carbon emissions.

Conference outcomes:

The Conference produced a package of documents collectively titled The Doha Climate Gateway over objections from Russia and other countries at the session.^[8] The documents collectively contained:

An eight year extension of the Kyoto Protocol until 2020 limited in scope to only 15% of the global carbon dioxide emissions due to the lack of participation of Canada, Japan, Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, New Zealand and the United States and due to the fact that developing countries like China (the world's largest emitter), India and Brazil are not subject to any emissions reductions under the Kyoto Protocol.^[9]

Language on loss and damage, formalized for the first time in the conference documents.

The conference made little progress towards the funding of the Green Climate Fund. [the plan to transfer 100 billion dollars to target countries]

Russia, Belarus and Ukraine objected at the end of the session, as they have a right to under the session's rules. In closing the conference, the President said that he would note these objections in his final report.

Others like Martin Khor of the South Center, an association of developing nations saw a more positive outcome, specifically regarding the Loss and Damage Mechanism:

"It is a breakthrough...The term Loss and Damage is in the text — this is a huge step in principle. Next comes the fight for cash."

Jennifer Morgan of the World Resources Institute told NPR about the Loss and Damage Mechanism that:

"This basically would set up a liability structure about who is liable for climate change...And while I think that's a very important question for people to answer, I don't think the world is ready for that yet."

Regarding the path to the $100 billion in Green Climate Fund financing, Jennifer Morgan told NPR the following:

"there's no bridge, no pathway between now and the $100 billion number...so one of the real crunch issues here, which I think will determine whether we will get out of the building with an agreement or not, is whether developed countries are ready to at least say that they're going to match what they've been providing thus far."

Behold yet another global transfer scheme of the internation communist union:

Green Climate Fund

"Oh we wanna save the environment dude ... just gimme my money first!"

"We'll stop polluting if you give us money, can't turn that knob till cash flows kamrad!"

China is exempt,

Remember in the 1990's when the USA were so evil for not ratifying Kyoto?

First Clinton and then Bush said the same damned thing – What kind of a solution is that if the biggest up and coming polluters are exempt?!

Duh!

Of course Clinton never was admonished – but Bush was of course the personification of evil, even though he only continued Clinton's policy towards Kyoto.

The Canadians are the only smart ones:

The failure to achieve meaningful progress and reach effective-CO2 reducing-policy treaties among the parties over the past eighteen years have driven some countries like the United States to never ratify the UNFCCC's largest body of work — the Kyoto Protocol, in large part because the treaty didn't cover developing countries who now include the largest CO2 emitters. It has also led Canada to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol out of a desire to not force its citizens to pay penalties that would result in wealth transfers out of Canada. Canada formally withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol in 2011.[17] Both the US and Canada are looking at Voluntary Emissions Reduction schemes that they can implement internally to curb carbon dioxide emissions outside of the Kyoto Protocol.

In 2010, Japan stated that it will not sign up to a second Kyoto term, because it would impose restrictions on it not faced by its main economic competitors, China, India and Indonesia.[20] A similar indication was given by the Prime Minister of New Zealand in November 2012.[21] These defections place additional pressures on the UNFCCC process that is seen by some as cumbersome and expensive: in the UK alone the climate change department has taken over 3,000 flights in two years at a cost of over ₤1,300,000 (British Pounds).

Statement by Japanese Masahiko Horie

"Only developed countries are legally bound by the Kyoto protocol and their emissions are only 26% [of global emissions]. If we continue the same, only one quarter of the world is legally bound and three quarters of countries are not bound at all."

Admitting their models are FLAWED and that they are hyping up fear:

United Nations and UNEP: methane thawing from permafrost

The United Nations gave a strong warning on the threat to the climate from methane in the thawing permafrost. This has not yet been included in models of the future climate. Permafrost contain 1,700 gigatonnes of carbon – twice the amount currently in the atmosphere. When it thaws, it could push global warming past one of the key "tipping points" that scientists believe could lead to runaway climate change. UNEP called IPCC to provide governments with the most up-to-date knowledge in the next IPCC reports next year.[27]

You just can't win with these assholes – first they close all the nuclear powerplants they can, then when you burn more coal – they don't want that either!

Proof that these idiots are out of touch with reality – if they think their pretty windturbines and solar cells can even come close to the megawatts provided by coal and nuclear powerplants.

Greenpeace

Lauri Myllyvirta from Greenpeace Nordic states that the key reason we are heading for 4°C of warming is coal burning. Massive expansion in the use of coal has caused more than two thirds of the increase in global CO2 emissions in recent years. Also the World Bank made plea for governments to avoid 4°C Warmer World. No new coal plants were constructed in Europe after 2007, but 1,200 coal plants are now being planned elsewhere: they can be stopped.

Even the wikipedia article admits to GLOBAL GOVERNANCE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_global_warming

Global Warming is the New Astrology

Global Warming, a "Wicked Problem" with added "Complexity":

Growth as crux:

All economies of the world and financial systems are based on "GROWTH".

Therefore the number one driving force behind all politics is also "growth".

GROWTH = UP  -mandated by our economic and financial system

Population = UP –mandated by "growth" see above

Consumption = UP – effect of growth + population see above

Pollution = UP(!) – direct effect of above mandates

Mathematical impossibility (challenge?):

How can a growing global economy of ever increasing population AND production AND consumption REDUCE CO2 and pollution i.e. OUTPUT?

Well the truth is ... it can't be.

If we take a serious look at the GROWTH PROJECTIONS by our most trusted politicians, the growth projections that are necessary to ensure that our system doesn't collapse – then it is impossible for a nation to grow at the projected rates AND consume less AND pollute less.

Unless of course some kind of miracle happens which magically reverses the effects of Newtonian physics.

I.e. we would have to force 2+2 = 5 or better said 2+2 = 3.

In other words – there is no way with the given parameters and criteria to pollute less and despite that - ensure enough growth to sustain our financial system.

So we are collectively

1.   Lying to ourselves about the realities of our self-created system
2.   In complete denial of reality i.e. 2+2=4

Now the challenge is to grow as an economy AND pollute less.

This is possible in the laboratory, but in real life it has proved impossible.

Our scientists have been very successful in making great new technologies which convert more energy more efficiently and produce less pollution BUT, 

and this is the crux ... 

all of these advances in efficiency and pollution reduction CANNOT REDUCE NET POLLUTION at the present projected growth rates!

See also Jevon's Paradox

So we are designed to fail.

Either we give up "growth" or we give up "consume less and pollute less" – they are mutually exclusive.

In face of the economic and financial problems – the politicians are forced to accept reality... and throw away this fantasy criteria+buzzword called "green" or "environment" or "CO2 reduction" or "pollute less" or "AGW" in favor of survival of their system of choice called "growth".

The problem is however, the politicians have already gotten hold of this new paranoia and realized a golden (literally golden for them) opportunity to CAPITALIZE on it!

A government can only do three things:

1.   Kill you / Bomb you
2.   Tax you
3.   Write more laws and regulations

So what is the result of the global warming paranoia?

• Carbon taxes
• carbon laws
• carbon caps, etc.

The result of those taxes of course is that companies like Lehman, Goldman&Sachs and Citicorp are "enriched" with gold in the form or our taxes.

Just follow the money – who is in charge of the "carbon portfolios"?

Like the  Global Warming Agenda, Astrology is also based on observable scientific facts:

·        Astrology

o   Planetary motion

o   Planetary positions

·        Global Warming Agenda

o   Mean global temperature drift

However, what our modern scientists fail to comprehend is that our modern science is a "Belief System".

We are naked emotional monkeys totally and completely ruled by emotions and cognitive biases.

"mind over heart" or "heart over mind".

No one really makes decisions with his mind and rational thinking alone.

Many years ago astrologers and astronomers argued about the consequences of the planet Mercury going retrograde.

They saw the apparent motion of Mercury "reverse" in the sky - hence the retrograde label.

This must have some kind of significance right?

When the closest planet to the sun reverses its direction!

Additionally, if all planets lined up – there was definitely a reason for it right?

Something of biblical proportions is about to happen!

It's totally obvious – look! The planets are lined up!

Like astrology, astronomy was also based on observable facts.

Somewhere along the line , reason and logic beat emotion and hyperbole and needless interpretations based on cognitive biases.

Astrology was put in the back drawer called "hokus pokus" and astronomy was elevated to our new belief system called "Science".

But is it really so?

When we look at our topic "AGW" or climate change or global warming, we see even the most proposedly logical and scientific human beings resorting to cognitive bias and emotion.

The very fact that there are several names for the emotional topic is proof that we are moving our "variable cognisance" around in a belief system.

Right now the politicians are appealing for the hyperbole that global warming is bad and we need more taxes to combat the temperature curve.

As if taxes ever had an effect on that!

Some scientists are saying – "BE RATIONAL", a two degree increase in temperature is what? Answer – a two degree increase in temperature. Nothing more nothing less.

No reason to fight about the interpretation.

The effects of a one or two degree temperature rise have never been determined to be "BAD"!

Another group of scientists are just simply keeping their mouths shut because they are getting paid to be on a research project and are glad to have  a job.

But just like in the movie "The Life of Brian", we emotional humans are just positively convinced that global warming is bad and we are heading over the edge of the world!

With idiot German producers making movies like the day after tomorrow and politicians all too eager to raise taxes and make new budgets and programs for their companies and cronies – it seems the truth and rational thinking will never have a chance.

Witness:

·        Galileo

o   Challenged the contemporary belief system of his time

o   and even tried to appease it and "fit" his heliocentric model into it.

o   To no avail – the belief system(the church) won and Galileo had to be punished for his "crime".

·        Don't think it can happen today – think we're different and more rational and enlightened now?

o   Have you heard of the seven Italian scientist who were sentenced for misrepresenting earth-quake data?

o   http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/10/22/italy-earthquake-scientists-trial.html

You call this unbiased science?

The scientists have become our modern druids.

Whatever happened to

Critical thinking

Measurable

Results

Newton's flaming laser sword?

I'll tell you what happened - they never existed.
They only exist in the laboratory and scientific journals.
In the real world we are governed by irrational emotion.
Ideology.

In German we say "Glauben ist nicht wissen".
Belief is not knowledge.
I always counter with "Glauben ist stärker als wissen".
Belief/Faith is stronger than knowledge.
Hence Galileo having to bend to his religious masters' will.
Hence the fact that astrology is in every newspaper and website and magazine to be found - even to this day.
Hence the global influence of Islam.
Hence scientists and other "critical thinkers" who vote for Obama because he is "for science" - even though he cancelled the moon program.