Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Saudi snow | Main | Greens lining the pockets of farmers »
Sunday
Dec132015

Cold light of day is earlier than usual

As predicted in our lighthearted look at the COPs, the breakthrough moment at COP21 was reached yesterday. The cold light of day appears to have been reached almost immediately afterwards.

Grand promises of Paris climate deal undermined by squalid retrenchments

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (122)

In fairness, the failure does not belong to the Paris talks, but to the whole process. A maximum of 1.5C, now an aspirational and unlikely target, was eminently achievable when the first UN climate change conference took place in Berlin in 1995. Two decades of procrastination, caused by lobbying – overt, covert and often downright sinister – by the fossil fuel lobby, coupled with the reluctance of governments to explain to their electorates that short-term thinking has long-term costs, ensure that the window of opportunity is now three-quarters shut.

Sounds about right.

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:17 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

I despair that people, and especially politicians, can be so f***king stupid. Moving to Mars won't change anything though...

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:22 AM | Registered Commenterdavidchappell

Unbelievable: “shall” is changed to “should” in Article 4.4 – transforming the essence of the treaty from binding to non-binding – as a “technical amendment”, buried in others, hours after the “final” document was released and only at the much delayed plenary session to adopt it.

The treaty now gives the UK government carte blanche to amend the “target for 2050” in the 2008 Climate Change Act, effectively suspending it.

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:29 AM | Unregistered CommenterRichard Green

China and India don't want to sideline coal, gas and oil.
Therefore all other suggestions, arrangements, and agreements are moot. As for sinister fossil fuel interests, keep on drinking the Kool Aid Mr Clarke.

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:31 AM | Unregistered CommenterEd Moran

"Sounds about right" (Phil Clarke)

No it doesn't Phil. The overwhelming reason why "the window of opportunity is now three-quarters shut" is the developing countries' determination to grow their economies and improve the conditions of their very poor. Thus China, by providing affordable, reliable electric power derived from inexpensive fossil fuels, mainly coal, has lifted over 600 million people out of poverty in the last 30 years. That determination continues - and the Paris talks will no little, probably nothing, to change that.

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:39 AM | Registered CommenterRobin Guenier

With Barack Obama in the White House and a dirigiste government overseeing the negotiations in Paris, this is as good as it is ever likely to get. No likely successor to the US president will show the same commitment. In countries like the UK, grand promises abroad are undermined by squalid retrenchments at home. Whatever happens now, we will not be viewed kindly by succeeding generations.

If Moonbat has realised that this is the end...... then it must be over, what they haven't changed by now will not be changed.

I for one would like to offer utmost congratulations to all the environmental Marxists for a job well done, you achieved your goal. Obama has his moment enshrined in history, when the global average temperature is seen to lower in the coming years, as no more adjustments are necessary once a new presidency starts there will be much rejoicing and naming of children after the savior of the world. (Slow hand clap)

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:40 AM | Registered CommenterLord Beaverbrook

Well, Moonbat and the new resident troll got one thing right:-
"Two decades of procrastination, caused by lobbying – overt, covert and often downright sinister – by the fossil fuel lobby, etc etc"
Yes, the fossil fuel lobby has been hard at work with their greenwash and has coughed up Millions in bungs to the Green Cultists. That's without even considering the Cult leaders actually on the payroll. Dana, for one.
Interesting that there is so little evidence that any of us evil sceptics even got a Christmas card from fossil fuel lobbyists that we now see the cultists actually resorting to fabricating evidence in an attempt to smear Will Happer.
One can reasonably wonder how much the troll himself is trousering. The fact that the first comment on here so frequently comes from trolls, is a clear indication that troll central is involved.

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:41 AM | Unregistered CommenterMartin Brumby

Most of the world emissions a result of capitalistic wasted effort as people try to access purchasing power to pay back the usury or escape domestic inflation (jet holidays etc)
This is certainly the case in Ireland.
Over half of the tax collected is not repent in the jurisdiction.
This is all the VAT and much of the Income tax.
Obviously this drives the supply chain outside the country as people cannot afford to buy domestically produced goods for the home market.

The European post war usury experiment has created Asian mercantile industry.
The guys in Paris then blame the Europeans when this synthetic system was imposed on us.
The only low waste economy / society is the peasant society / economy.

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:43 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

How can 40,000 people and a fortune in taxpayers' money produce nothing of any substance? The answer is that it's easy when the elite cannot be held to account for their stupidity, corruption and profligacy with other peoples' money

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:44 AM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

Can anybody understand the Dork? Can't you get rid of him Bish?

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:47 AM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

You fail to mention that the quote is from George Monbiot. His appraisal is correct, and I agree with his analysis though from a very different perspective. This 'agreement', or 'pact', is worthless. Firstly, the Emperor's first layer is that reducing emissions guarantees nothing, so how can you lower or raise temperature? Secondly, it is largely non binding,lets India and China to carry on for the medium term and hapless Obama will fail to get it through Congress.

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:53 AM | Unregistered Commentertrefjon

@Phillip Bratby: I never understand anything he says, & no idea what he's smokinh either, but in the interests of even handidness, I wouldn't necessarily want to see him "removed", it would be like becoming a warmista, that's their game.

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:54 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlan the Brit

@Phil
You need to have at least a basic map of history to understand what's going on.
It appears you do not.

Mercator by Nick Crane
Chapter 1 :A little town called Gangelt
“In Gangelt they were locked into the fate of the peasant, who was currently enduring rural Europe transition from an ancient feudal system to a money economy ,where the freedom to work for a wage came at the cost of dispossession from the land , as owners consolidated their estates for commercial production”
The rising prices of farm produce benefited the large farmers and estate owners,but crippled the peasants who were forced to work more ,for lower wages for crops that were not theirs.
As larger farms became more viable ,the ancient privileges which gave peasants the wherewithal to live off the land was eroded.
A new term emerged ,”roboten” , meaning drudge ,toil ,fag , sweat.
The peasant became a wage slave ,a Robot.
To the daily drudgery was added punitive taxes and periodic demands for men and horses to fight the emperors campaigns”

Dec 13, 2015 at 11:59 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Point 1. We can get on with exploiting shale gas, in the hope that reliable power generation, (nuclear?) can be better developed.

Point 2. If the science is settled, and this is the solution, why the hell do we still need so many climate scientists, and associated parasites?

Point 3, petrol in the Portsmouth area is under £1 a litre. Everyone sees this as very encouraging for business, trade, and personal wellbeing.

Point 4, when are air fares going to fall so more of us can enjoy frequent air travel like climate scientists?

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:10 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Russia a little while back: (Climate mongering)

"This subject has failed to become a priority," says Konstantin Simonov, the founder of a non-governmental oil and gas research fund who often appears on Russian media.

"Russia's attitude will most likely be something like this: Guys, you put economic pressure on us, introduced sanctions. Do you expect us to be holier than the Pope about the issue you're pushing through and take a load of responsibilities?"

Answer = No!

Think Putins going for $40 Barrel price for next 7 years?

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:15 PM | Unregistered CommenterEx-expat Colin

The objective of current euro policy is to raise prices
End of.
This is the latest chapter in a very long running scheme.
It began in England with the Tudor inflation.
For the suburban tin man fossil energy inflation rather then food ( a major energy product of the pre industrial Age) is the vehicle of choice.

The most extreme example of this mad effort to raise prices is the biomass wood pellet scam.
It's trade to increase the friction ( wasted Effort) of the system rather then delivering the goods you cannot produce. ( Tea, bananas etc)

World trades function at the moment is to reduce wealth rather then increase it.
We can see this now as Bunker fuel prices begin another 2009 like decline.
The real economics point to it being burned in European power stations rather then the great oceans.

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:17 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

I wonder how Monbiot, in his late 60s, will explain ~ 1.5 K cooling in the depths of the new Little Ice Age?

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterNCC 1701E

Ah. The moonbat uses the Left's favourite word. "should"

Along with "ought".

The Left is SO good at telling us how it OUGHT to be and what we SHOULD do but utterly fails to engage with how it actually IS..

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:20 PM | Unregistered CommenterLeo Smith

United Nations Convention on the Law of Treaties, Signed at Vienna 23 May 1969, Entry into Force: 27 January 1980

Section 2. – Invalidity of Treaties

Article 46 – Provisions of internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties
Article 47 – Specific restrictions on authority to express the consent of a State
Article 48 – Error
Article 49 – Fraud
Article 50 – Corruption of a representative of a State
Article 51 – Coercion of a representative of a State
Article 52 – Coercion of a State by the threat or use of force
Article 53 – Treaties conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens)

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterAnoneumouse

@Golf Charlie.
It's good that prices are falling but you are falling for the trap of more wasted effort (extra cars and Planes eating your surplus)
Austerity is simply the rationing process designed to feed the consumer war economy.

In the Ireland of the 80s depression the prices of domestic goods was kept up (via VATetc) but airfares came down.
It was a simple and artificial transfer of energy which destroyed village economies.
The banks have been at war against the local from the very beginning
The objective is to destroy all redundancy.
To create the perfect consumer.

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:31 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

There needs to be a warning on posts like these. I hate clicking on a link, that sends me to the guardian web site.

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:42 PM | Unregistered Commentervieras

Has this 'deal' actually achieved anything of substance, rather than what (again) looks merely like fluff and window-dressing for its own sake?

China and India: as you were, emit away to your hearts content.
Global emissions: Set to continue to rise.
Coal: Some 2,500 new coal plants worldwide!

Seriously, what has it actually achieved?

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:43 PM | Unregistered CommenterCheshireRed

The banks inflated Ireland in the 60s with all the promise of a bright future .
Then deflated it in the 80s.

Tarbets heavy oil went into international trade.
Now that trade is imploding .
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hvIHjRP5r3o

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:50 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Mr Clarke (Dec 13, 2015 at 11:17 AM), you appear to believe anything that supports your entrenched views, don’t you? Is it that you are truly that gullible, or do you see it as a means to your own, personal, self-enrichment? One thing you seem not to understand is that few on this site, or on many other “denier” sites I have visited have views as entrenched as yours.

Most of us will accept the doctrine of AGW and CAGW, and that there is anything that can be done about it if any evidence could be shown to support it! As yet, there has been no evidence at all in support of your views, but an awful lot of evidence that contradicts them – the world has not warmed much at all, sea levels have not risen alarmingly, the Arctic ice is still there, the Antarctic ice has grown, there have been far fewer weather “extremes” in recent years. No amount of jumping up and down in front of the cameras, shouting how bad the weather is, proves that the weather is any worse than has happened at so many other times in history. So, records have been broken; but records are there to be broken – in fact, there were far more records being broken near the start of record-keeping than are being broken now! In reality, that claim proves nothing, whatsoever, and no amount of raising the bogey man that the “fossil fuel industry” has become can change that.

Your views, and of those you support, will keep many suffering the extremes of poverty around the world, unable to access cheap the energy that will raise them out of it, and consign many more to join their subsistence living, as they, too, lose the benefits of cheap energy. You, of course, will be well-ensconced in your ivory tower, lording it over the peasants who disagree with you. That is one of the aims that you and your ilk seem to want – that only the privileged should be allowed to live as they wish to live; others have to live as they are told to live. I, however, and many others, want everybody to live exactly as they wish to live.

Dec 13, 2015 at 12:55 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

The US signed the Kyoto Protocol on 12 November 1998, during the Clinton presidency. To become binding in the US, however, the treaty had to be ratified by the Senate, which had already passed the 1997 non-binding Byrd-Hagel Resolution, expressing disapproval of any international agreement that did not require developing countries to make emission reductions and "would seriously harm the economy of the United States".

The resolution passed 95-0.Therefore, even though the Clinton administration signed the treaty, it was never submitted to the Senate for ratification.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol#US_position

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:00 PM | Unregistered Commenteresmiff

My thoughts on COP come down to:

1. COPxx is always the greatest demonstration of the way the advocates of good causes always confuse movement with action.

2. The world leaders are not necessarily looking for a solution to CC - they know that temperatures will start to fall of their own volition in a year or two. What they are looking for is a reason to tax the hell out of us by making us feel guilty for using fossil-fuels and, conversely (perversely?) for not taking up renewables as they have dictated. Then, when the temperature falls, (and I have been banging on about this for a long time) they will claim that all the pain of taxation has been worth it: the medicine is working - we must have more of it.

3. Green fascism will make for some people very wealthy - who couldn't give a rat's a*rse for the environment - and some other people exceedingly poor.

4. This is not a complete list....

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterHarry Passfield

This sprang to mind after reading a bit of the Monbiot piece:

'There’s something Eric Hoffer said: “Intellectuals cannot operate at room temperature.” There always has to be a crisis–some terrible reason why their superior wisdom and virtue must be imposed on the unthinking masses. It doesn’t matter what the crisis is. A hundred years ago it was eugenics. At the time of the first Earth Day a generation ago, the big scare was global cooling, a big ice age. They go from one to the other. It meets their psychological needs and gives them a reason for exercising their power.'

Thomas Sowell, https://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2009/11/29/intellectuals-cannot-operate-at-room-temperature/

I guess Monbiot might qualify under the somewhat vague term of 'intellectual', although I think he is more just an exploiter of scares, and other vivid stuff he encounters and with which he feels he can impress and cajole his followers.

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:02 PM | Registered CommenterJohn Shade

RR
One of the records that has been broken several times in the last few years is the length of time since the last Cat 3+ hurricane made landfall on the US mainland. We don't hear a lot about that from Clarke's Coterie, do we?
I wonder why not.

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:06 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

Philip Bratby (Dec 13, 2015 at 11:47 AM): he (I am assuming the gender based upon the self-applied label of “Dork”) is a mystery; I am still trying to get round the logic of capitalism being puritanism in another guise. No, keep him – his comments are much like those infernal riddles that used to crop up with Dusty Bin in 3-2-1.

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:07 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

"the window of opportunity is now three-quarters shut"

Oh, for crying out loud. Does that mean we'll have to endure another "last chance" in 5 years time?

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:09 PM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

Martin Brumby

"Yes, the fossil fuel lobby has been hard at work with their greenwash and has coughed up Millions in bungs to the Green Cultists. "

Exactly. This is global warming central, IETA *

The GHG Market 2015/16 report went to press in early November, emphasising the theme of “Making Waves”. Our vision was positive, that messages emanating from Paris in support of carbon pricing could change the world.


http://www.ieta.org/ghgmarket2015

* The International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) is a nonprofit business organization created in June 1999 to establish a functional international framework for trading in greenhouse gas emission reductions.


Members include Bloomberg, BP, Chevron, Dow Chemical Company etc.


http://www.ieta.org/our-members

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:11 PM | Unregistered Commenteresmiff

@Radical

Sometimes only the fool has licence to speak the truth.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Nwysi0MMX54

Ps
Puritanism = wasted saving.
The autumn harvest saved and not consumed is waste as it will get spoiled.
Why did not Cromwell and the lads want to ban Christmas.

Perhaps so they can keep all the autumn harvest for themselves ?

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:22 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Get signing!

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/114907

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:31 PM | Unregistered Commentermarchesarosa

Eh. A bunch of politicians got together and agreed to start controlling the weather, is that it?

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:37 PM | Unregistered CommenterBloke in Central Illinois

@ Phillip Bratby at 11:44 AM

"How can 40,000 people ..... produce nothing of any substance?"

Sadly, you're mistaken Philip:

"The amount of emissions produced at the Bourget conference site has been provisionally evaluated to be 21,000 tons of CO2 equivalent ....... "

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/the-carbon-footprint-of-cop21-frequently-asked-questions/

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:41 PM | Unregistered CommenterJoe Public

Thank you, MJ: I was reluctant to point out that most of the records being broken are those of quiescence, not action.

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:45 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

The more immediate problem is that regardless of what the UK is or is not required to do, we can be sure that our politicians on all sides will use this as a reason for implementing all sorts of restrictions on us (which will not affect them), going far beyond the minimum requirements.

The question is why so many of them are so committed to this. How much of it is just that they think they won't be voted out for wrecking the economy and destroying jobs if they can blame it on the need to mitigate CAGW?

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterNW

@Phil Clarke

lobbying – overt, covert and often downright sinister

is about right but not in the way you and Moonbat claim.

Enron-ism prevails - maybe - but the claims in the article are clearly in Erlich BS territory - and yet again George flirts with hard obviously unintended irony in his final sentence

And let them temper it with an apology to all those it will betray.

Would that the Green lobby apologised for mountains of lies, exaggeration and repeated attempts to bully their way to power.... (or, ahem... bully their way to impose an overpriced , erratic not fit for purpose "power" system on the rest of us)

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:55 PM | Registered Commentertomo

We can look back now at "Green" economists such as Richard Tol postings on a bright LNG future

In my opinion he is not a environmental economist but a expression of typical orange capitalism.

i.e.- to engage in pointless economic expansion via the mode of capitalistic efficiency .(which is a illusion)

Now we are close to the point of burning heavy fuel oil directly into euro economies rather then using that oil to carry LNG , coal and god forbid wood pellets.

This will mean dramatically less waste capital goods will be produced.
Perhaps a end to suburbia.

Dec 13, 2015 at 1:58 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Tomo


"but the claims in the article are clearly in Erlich BS territory"


Yes, exactly. My website. Who is George Monbiot ? http://goo.gl/LH73d5

Dec 13, 2015 at 2:01 PM | Unregistered Commenteresmiff

@marchesarosa

3 within my family...done 3

Dec 13, 2015 at 2:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterEx-expat Colin

The BBC’s Matt McGarth made a one minute video a couple of months go to explain what COP21 was really about.
1. To limit global CO2 emissions (should be GHG emissions)
2. To change the nature of how we do business on this planet. Which is how we produce, how we farm and how we consume. This is a long term goal it is about changing the very nature of progress.

The second point was never on the table. On the first point the talks have been an abject failure. Paragraph 17 mentions the difference in 2030 global emissions projections between the INDCs and the object required level to be on track for the 2C target. That is 55 against 40 gigatonnes. Then, on paragraph 21, rather than saying that genuine emissions reduction plans should be forthcoming, the UNFCCC asks the UNIPCC for some more scary stories and some more modelled emissions forecasts. Nothing has changed in actual policy from a UNFCCC report on the INDC submissions a few weeks ago. Current policy proposals will make very little difference to global emissions, and there is unlikely to be anything forthcoming. Details here.

Dec 13, 2015 at 2:16 PM | Unregistered CommenterKevin Marshall

For those countries with an industrial heritage, this is an unprecedented last chance to save the planet.

For everyone else, this is an unbinding agreement, that will allow them to catch up.

For those with common sense, how do we limit global warming to 1.5C when it has stopped warming anyway, and climate science experts don't know why?

For historians, the French revolution was partially triggered by incompetent corruption by the privileged few, leading to Napolean and massive damage and change to the European map and history. The population of France seems to have got sick of the privileged few in France and Europe, dictating policy with concomitant fraud, incompetence and corruption. Hopefully this time they won't be embarking on a reign of terror, but taking steps to halt various wars being waged in Europe. The BBC and Guardian are very worried about Marine Le Pen, so this is probably a good thing.

Dec 13, 2015 at 2:21 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Over at Jo Nova's site she notes the existence of a handy Cop Out clause. Parties may withdraw from the agreement, provided they have a sick note from their Mum or something.

Separately, there are no opportunities for compensation claims from poor countries on richer ones. If that is the case, there is no point in tropical islands claiming sea levels are rising, when they are not. Climate scientists may not be so welcome on tropical islands anymore, but hopefully some industrial towns with smog problems will welcome climate scientists, so they don't feel completely unwanted.

Dec 13, 2015 at 2:46 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Kevin Marshall
Item 2 will never be on the table but don't be fooled by that.
I have no doubt that the greatest regret of Maurice Strong's life is that he didn't live long enough to see his dream of a New World Order come about.
But he did live long enough to see Agenda 21 develop into Agenda 2030 and Harrabin gave the game away with his remark:

Negotiators here are in effect discussing the shape of a new world order.
Also:
We’re trying to change the entire global economy….

Which he then rapidly corrected to
…or at least the UN’s trying to change the entire global economy.
That is still the goal and the question is how they are going to get there because they know, and we know they know (and I suspect they know that we know that they know!) that climate is only a thimble in this game and we haven't yet worked out which thimble the pea is under!

Dec 13, 2015 at 3:00 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

@Phil Clarke You raised the fallacy "climate policy is derailed by fossil fuel lobbying"
#1 Please show reports that deal with recent time (last 15 years) that take account of fossil-fuels, Green lobbying and government lobbying and debunk the skeptics thought that skeptical lobbying is not even one thousandth of pro-alarmism lobbying.

#2 Now that UK petrol prices are £1/litre, are petrol corps set to make bumper profits ?
Isn't their profit per litre the higher the price is ?|
since : profit =sales X margin. ..Like are sales going to go up by 30% ?

I assert that fossil fuel companies love climate alarmism as it drives up fuel prices and therefore they make more $ for each litre they sell.

Dec 13, 2015 at 3:01 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

stewgreen, global warmists don't understand basic economics. Stern has proved that on numerous occasions, with full support from the Grauniad and BBC.

Dec 13, 2015 at 3:07 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Global warming, who needs it, our course is already set [to self destruct].


A straight 'Ten on TEN' for monotonous autobot repetition. God Strewth....can't he do any better than that, cripes he 'sounds' like that mudskipper brain Johnny Prescott. Then, yet more and more scurrilous allusion and for bumptious hyperbole, he's not changed at all really has he? He's still THE MOONBAT........ and.....AND he's as mad as a belfry full of rabid bats who've just gorged on a nightly diet of mad cows. Oh and btw, Sky or some apologist advocate idiot's lantern advertiser interviewed Kumi Naidoo or whatever his moniker is, his shifty antics, his mad eyes, I thought - either coming down from an excess of Colombian marching powder/ space juice or, he was, is an OCD and far gone with it. But Moonbat, what's his excuse?

Lets reprise, how's about this for total pure hogwash - doesn't it make him inwardly cringe, does he really believe his own luvviedom propaganda-byline, shurely not? Or, is it too late his madness too far gone?

With Barack Obama in the White House and a dirigiste government overseeing the negotiations in Paris, this is as good as it is ever likely to get. No likely successor to the US president will show the same commitment. In countries like the UK, grand promises abroad are undermined by squalid retrenchments at home. Whatever happens now, we will not be viewed kindly by succeeding generations.

So yes, let the delegates congratulate themselves on a better agreement than might have been expected. And let them temper it with an apology to all those it will betray.

"all those it will betray" - yakety yak pass the tissues, crocodile tears overfloweth...... and oh puhleeze....and do give over George!

Betrayed is it?

This present CON government, they and as part of the previous incumbents alongside 13 years of scorched earth from Bliar and his echelons of Cultural Marxist divs and another 5 of Major before them.... and going right back to Woy Jenkins and his mates Wilson and Crosland: the British have been betrayed by the political claque for two generations plus thanks to the aforementioned.......all future generations have been saddled with a national debt and with 'add ons' it will be north estimated by some at £7 Trillion and then the public sector will just be a fond sepia tinged pink folk memory. Mind you, we'll all be speaking Gugurati, Punjabi, Waziri, Kashmiri, Bengali too care.

Soon............ George, and this ain't politicized allegory but it's doom laden all the same but this is not illusory it's the Gods gospel truth - it will be lights out for you and probably for us all - pal and yeah we've been betrayed all right - thanks to Socialist/Statist inspired little helpers, like you. So....... where will you run, Kiribati, Tuvalu or, far more likely to French Polynesia?

Dec 13, 2015 at 3:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterAthelstan.

Germany abolishing nuclear power ..Hey Obama is that cos they think that Climate Change is the biggest threat to the planet ?
There's more CO2 in the world cos of Germany's decision

Dec 13, 2015 at 3:17 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Just as nobody reads IPCC reports, most of our greenie friends won't read this treaty, they now have a law to quote and exploit, the war on fossil fuels will increase in intensity, increasingly in courts, the wigs are organised, the NGOs lavishly funded, the media onside (Harrabin revealing himself in Paris as activist in plain sight), no amount of data analysis will be allowed to change the narrative.

Dec 13, 2015 at 3:21 PM | Unregistered CommenterMikky

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>