Climate change - the POLITICAL debate (Vol 7)

[kerplunk]

For anyone interested in catching up on the 'outreach' Svalgaard has been doing on climate blogs for years in relation to solar theory, where it's been, where it is, and where it's headed etc, I recommend starting with the place I first noticed his contributions - on Steve McIntyre's blog here.

https://climateaudit.org/2007/11/30/svalgaard-sola...

I've already a posted a couple of WUWT articles that Svalgaard has participated in in the comments but there's many more that can be found via google.

He is a rich vein.

[Randy Winkman]

turbobloke said:

Thanks for the ongoing personal attention kerplunk, it's flattering and very encouraging.

I say I say I say...

The host of Cop26 needs to be a master of diplomacy. Unfortunately, it’s Boris Johnson

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct...

Oddly, some people seem to think he's rather good. So it might actually work.

[turbobloke]

Shift change?

What with brexit and global warming, work is busy busy so I'll have to give COP26 a miss. The saving grace is knowing I'll be able to read about its failures successes on the BBC's website.

[Diderot]

I’ve been developing a state of the art, casino stats model to predict the COP26 process. The results are just in: there’s 24.867% probability (at 60% confidence level) that there’ll be a COVID outbreak which will disrupt proceedings. There’s also a 98% probability (98% confidence level) that there’ll be tense negotiations, in spite of the fact that Russia and Saudi etc aren’t there, with seemingly no resolution in sight, McGrath and Harrabin will be frothing at the mouth, but hardworking delegates will push on throughout the final few nights to produce some joint declaration about their ambitions for COP27. The real eye opener is that there’s a 100% guarantee (100% confidence level) that c. 25,000 people flying in from all over the world to attend (unless the planes are fuelled by fairy farts) will have a huge carbon footprint. Still, no matter what the levels of hypocrisy involved, it’s a climate emergency.

[Randy Winkman]

So the response to the global warming issue seems to be light comedy. I guess that sums it up.

[Kawasicki]

Randy Winkman said:

So the response to the global warming issue seems to be light comedy. I guess that sums it up.

In a recent peer reviewed study less than 1% of climate related papers state that climate change is mainly due to humans.

You have to laugh.

[dickymint]

Kawasicki said:

Randy Winkman said:

So the response to the global warming issue seems to be light comedy. I guess that sums it up.

In a recent peer reviewed study less than 1% of climate related papers state that climate change is mainly due to humans.

You have to laugh.

Could you be more explicit or is it implicit......no I beg you please don't my belly is still aching from laughing at the "Post a load of papers with no actual opinion or discussion allowed Climate Thread"

[Diderot]

Randy Winkman said:

So the response to the global warming issue seems to be light comedy. I guess that sums it up.

Let’s see what transpires

[Diderot]

Diderot said:

Randy Winkman said:

So the response to the global warming issue seems to be light comedy. I guess that sums it up.

Let’s see what transpires

ETA: transpires at COP26.

WRT the soi-disant ‘Climate Emergency’, (cue flashing blue lights, sirens/3 minute warnings/dive under the nearest table as the sky is really falling in etc) the current ‘runaway’, unprecedented and hugely dangerous warming heating, is merely some 0.8 degrees (at worst through data torture mise en abîme) since those halcyon days before ‘t mills oop north and Stevenson’s Rocket.

We need to be seriously alarmed by that. It is really, very, very, hugely, seriously, monumentally scary. Tipping points on the horizon, and doom just around every corner they promise. Let alone the impact on biodiversity that’s next in line for the ‘PR push’. It’s akin to Alice in Wonderland: always jam tomorrow never today.

Worth reminding the seriously freaked out that Romans had it warmer when building their roads and the masons constructing the great European Cathedrals in the 13th to 15th centuries had it warmer too. No matter, they had soothsayers, witches, sages, rune throwers and, for the Romans, polytheistic ideology to comfort them. We have the IPCC. Plus ça change. Or as The Who eloquently puts it:

There's nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again, no, no
Yeah
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

[mko9]

Diderot said:

ETA: transpires at COP26.

WRT the soi-disant ‘Climate Emergency’, (cue flashing blue lights, sirens/3 minute warnings/dive under the nearest table as the sky is really falling in etc) the current ‘runaway’, unprecedented and hugely dangerous warming heating, is merely some 0.8 degrees (at worst through data torture mise en abîme) since those halcyon days before ‘t mills oop north and Stevenson’s Rocket.

We need to be seriously alarmed by that. It is really, very, very, hugely, seriously, monumentally scary. Tipping points on the horizon, and doom just around every corner they promise. Let alone the impact on biodiversity that’s next in line for the ‘PR push’. It’s akin to Alice in Wonderland: always jam tomorrow never today.

Worth reminding the seriously freaked out that Romans had it warmer when building their roads and the masons constructing the great European Cathedrals in the 13th to 15th centuries had it warmer too. No matter, they had soothsayers, witches, sages, rune throwers and, for the Romans, polytheistic ideology to comfort them. We have the IPCC. Plus ça change. Or as The Who eloquently puts it:

There's nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again, no, no
Yeah
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

How do I post a .gif of Greta saying "How dare you?!"

[Ivan stewart]

It’s the Bloody hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy,
We are being visited by gogarfinchams ,
Boris is the captain in the bath !!!
We’re doomed I tell thee

[turbobloke]

Ivan stewart said:

It’s the Bloody hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy,
We are being visited by gogarfinchams ,
Boris is the captain in the bath !!!
We’re doomed I tell thee

Please can sir resume the required state of panic, frivolity troubles Greta and others too, we can't have that. Not too often anyway. Well, OK, as you were.

[turbobloke]

https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/shameful-fail...

Link said:

Wealthy nations that promised climate finance for vulnerable countries conceded on Monday that an annual $100-billion goal, due to be met from 2020, will not be reached until 2023, which campaigners warned could thwart progress at upcoming U.N. talks.

It's about the environment so follow the bunny. Actually, as the UN IPCC's top climate official Edenhofer has reminded us, it's not about the environment. "We (UN IPCC) de facto redistribute the world's wealth by climate policy. That has almost nothing to do with environmental policy".

Naturally this honesty had to be defended to the hilt and there are claims that the above quote is made up or taken out of context, so here's the full original Edenhofer interview in German. PHers can register if needed (free and easy) then apply any preferred translation method.

https://www.nzz.ch/klimapolitik_verteilt_das_weltv...

"Aber man muss klar sagen: Wir verteilen durch die Klimapolitik de facto das Weltvermögen um. Dass die Besitzer von Kohle und Öl davon nicht begeistert sind, liegt auf der Hand. Man muss sich von der Illusion freimachen, dass internationale Klimapolitik Umweltpolitik ist. Das hat mit Umweltpolitik, mit Problemen wie Waldsterben oder Ozonloch, fast nichts mehr zu tun."

"But one must be clear: we are de facto redistributing world wealth through climate policy. It is obvious that the owners of coal and oil are not enthusiastic about it. One has to get rid of the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. That has almost nothing to do with environmental policy, with problems such as forest dieback or the ozone hole."


COP26 chimney emission 'keep your hands off my stack'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0kcet4aPpQ

[Pan Pan Pan]

Diderot said:

Randy Winkman said:

So the response to the global warming issue seems to be light comedy. I guess that sums it up.

Let’s see what transpires

Yeah, but no, but yeah, but no,
The idiots who have been sitting in the roads recently, have been telling us that tens of thousands of people, are going to die from the cold! I wish they would make up their minds, are we going to die from being over warm, or over cold?
I dont know whether to get my bear fur coat (simulated) or mankini, out of the wardrobe FFS!

Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Tuesday 26th October 11:31

[Bathroom_Security]

Every time I read the BBC its about climate change, reducing my co2 by not flying and taking a bike and of course not eating meat

[anonymous-user]

Amazing that the PHs climate science experts haven’t changed the scientific consensus yet, with some of the fascinating revelations of the last few pages.

Are you guys doing anything with all this incredible knowledge or just posting it on a car forum?

I think you need to get it published and peer reviewed etc.

Must be frustrating to know all the experts and governments have it wrong but then be so incapable of doing anything with your findings?

Some of you even have scientific backgrounds, you think you’d know how to go about it? Imagine just sitting back and watching what must be the greatest scam in the history of science, knowing it’s all wrong and doing nothing.

[turbobloke]

Boris is very worried about COP26, poor chap. There's no reason to be worried, COPs are a success even when they fail, as per COP25, and COP24, and...

https://news.sky.com/story/cop26-boris-johnson-ver...

[hairykrishna]

turbobloke said:

Naturally this honesty had to be defended to the hilt and there are claims that the above quote is made up or taken out of context, so here's the full original Edenhofer interview in German. PHers can register if needed (free and easy) then apply any preferred translation method.

In the interests of this new found transparency of your TB, why didn't you quote a larger section? That way it's clear that he's not saying that the purpose of climate policy is not redistribution of wealth, instead that redistribution of wealth between countries is an inevitable consequence of not using the coal and oil reserves. Anyone who thinks that massively reducing the value of fossil fuels won't change the world's wealth distribution may be a little slow.

random internet translation said:

(EDENHOFER): Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet - and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400 - there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.

(NZZ AM SONNTAG): De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

(EDENHOFER): First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

[turbobloke]

hairykrishna said:

turbobloke said:

Naturally this honesty had to be defended to the hilt and there are claims that the above quote is made up or taken out of context, so here's the full original Edenhofer interview in German. PHers can register if needed (free and easy) then apply any preferred translation method.

In the interests of this new found transparency of your TB, why didn't you quote a larger section? That way it's clear that he's not saying that the purpose of climate policy is not redistribution of wealth, instead that redistribution of wealth between countries is an inevitable consequence of not using the coal and oil reserves. Anyone who thinks that massively reducing the value of fossil fuels won't change the world's wealth distribution may be a little slow.

random internet translation said:

(EDENHOFER): Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet - and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400 - there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.

(NZZ AM SONNTAG): De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

(EDENHOFER): First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

That's very funny, you ought to be paid for content like that. It says the same thing as per my post, with other bits added, like the atmosphere expropriation fiction, which you included to do what - repeat some credo assertions of the green carbon faith, give PHers a laugh that politicians and UN IPCC 'top officials' think they can control a complex chaotic coupled non-linear climate system part-time via taxation and lifestyle control and hence the planet's temperature to decimals of a degree C, or just include more of Edenhofer's wibble in order to obfuscate and hope PHers won't notice?

Edenhofer clearly says that UN IPCC climate policy is not about the environment it's about redistributing the world's wealth. It's in bold in your quote above, and in my earlier post. Anyone can check it out, as you did, and see that Edenhofer says what I said he said. It's about redistribution of wealth, politics, hence this thread from LongQ which was started due to climate being about politics.

https://www.nzz.ch/klimapolitik_verteilt_das_weltv...

AGW, COP26, both, must be going badly when you emerge from thread semi-retirement to push The Cause for The Team. Nevertheless, here's a slightly belated welcome back to the thread.

[turbobloke]

PS did you translate the article headline?

"Climate policy redistributes world wealth"