Copenhagen Climate Conference Fails Big Time; Even the Weather Knows It
Posted: Friday, December 18, 2009
by Mogama
http://www.mogama.info
According to the Copenhagen Climate Council website, the first world World Future Energy Summit was held in Abu Dhabi from January 21 to 23, 2008. The second meeting also took place at the same venu from January 19 to 21, 2009. It brought together 18,420 visitors from 84 countries; 1,124 conference delegates; 200 key speakers; 804 VIPs; 734 accredited journalists; and 144 official delegates from 19 countries.
Hope was in the air, as the global warmists began mapping out their plan to craft the most wide-ranging climate agreement in the history of climate talks. Copenhagen would be the place where the champions and custodians of earth's climate would finally seize firm and total control of the global thermostat. Copenhagen would wipe away the disgrace of Kyoto.
But once again hope proved to be one thing, reality quite another. Early in the talks, it became clear that richer nations were unwilling to bow to loud demands by poorer countries that their wealthier counterparts shoulder the total cost of climate control.
“ You must pay us to keep our rain forest and fossil fuel reserves," undeveloped nations insisted in so many words.
To which the delegates of wealthy nations replied, “Our taxpayers will never fall for that. Can you be more reasonable in your demands?"
“ No, there will be no deal unless you pay us not to pollute like you," said the smaller polluters, who made it a practice to storm out of the meetings.
No amount of fuzzy feelings and conflict resolution tactics could bridge the gulf-like divide.
Negotiators from China and the United States, the world's two leading polluters banged heads and halted in a logjam for much of the two-week discussions. Partisans of either giants watched the stalemate to the loud frustrations of global warming activists who used ceaseless protests to pressure the conferees.
Then President Obama arrived, and hope rose one last time for the salvation of Hopenhagen as mockers call it. Soon we began to hear reports that the American President had made progress in bringing back to the negotiating table members of the Chinese and Indian delegations who were about to board their fossil-fuel jet planes back to their respected countries.
The American leader emerged like a lame hero to declare victory, but climate change activists were the least impressed with the outcome. The sight was reminiscent of the President's failure to bring the Olympic games to his hometown of Chicago. Putting the best spin on an unsatisfying deal became President Obama's lot.
However, though climate activists had hoped otherwise, the absence of a non-binding agreement was not entirely unexpected. For example, on November 14, 2009, it was reported that "President Obama and other world leaders have decided to put off the difficult task of reaching a climate change agreement... agreeing instead to make it the mission of the Copenhagen conference to reach a less specific 'politically binding' agreement" (New York Times). On that basis, the President could claim success of some sort.
In a strange twist of fate, the conference that produced one of the largest carbon footprints in the history of man-made global warming, came to a close with nature's unbeatable sarcasm: The weather forecast calls for a winter storm that is expected to dump up to 24 inches of snow on the northeastern region of the United States. That means our President must be in a hurry leaving the global warming conference to fly back to Washington in time before the cold stuff blankets the lawn of the White House.
Only Mother Nature could execute such a public spanking. And one cannot help but ask, “Where will the man-made global warmists meet next to seal the deal? At the North Pole?" (Click this link to sign up as a new author, /Register.asp. )
This Article has been viewed 574 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (6 total)This was a farce from the moment it was announced, and skeptics around the planet are now saying: 'see, they haven't a clue'. You brought up an excellent point in one of your earlier articles about tele-conferencing, and these 'leaders' simply do not get it: they don't understand we are tired of the 'do as I say, not as I do' mentality. The funny thing is the spin will win (as it usually does). I for one am not laughing.Great article, sir.
You're right, Michael. Their inconsistent conduct of massive pollution is their primary obstacle to reaching their goals. But they may still succeed despite the hypocrisy. Still waiting for them to use video conferencing for one of their climate talks. ~mogama~
Mr. Mogama,One winter storm does not discount global warming. I live in Houston, where before two weeks ago, we had not had a hard winter freeze in over 5 years. I have a hibiscus which is considered a seasonal plant here that had gotten as high as my house because it never froze back like it used to. A warming trend is just that, a trend. There is data showing that the last decade is very nearly the warmest on record. It has certainly been true here. Not only have we not been having the winter freezes, we just finished one of the hottest summers on record. Plus, the glaciers ARE melting.I'm not rubber stamping this issue and saying I believe every single thing they say about this, but we need to use logic that follows all the way through... saying that one winter storm in an area that normally has winter storms, somehow disproves global warming, just doesn't intellectually add up.Don't get me wrong, Jean, I don't mean to say one incident of a winter storm dismisses global warming. I do not argue against a warming trend, especially the melting of the glaciers. But as you may know, the verdict is still out on whether or not humans are the primary culprit of a warming earth. And even more doubtful still is the thesis that we have the power or skill to stop or reverse the trend. Like millions of others, I am challenging the activists of global warming to be consistent. I have been buying the green bulbs, and I'm currently looking into a solar panel, so it frustrates me when climate-change activists make huge carbon footprints, while decrying the evil of emitting carbon. They are being illogical by undermining the message, and I think that remains the primary obstacle to getting their message across more powerfully. Thanks, Jean, for your comment. ~mogama~"the verdict is still out on whether or not humans are the primary culprit of a warming earth"The verdict isn't really out - over 97% of climatologists accept that human activity has lead to increasing global temperature. And the fact that atmospheric CO2 traps heat is not doubted by science, nor is the fact that reducing CO2 output will slow any temperature rise.A quote from wiki illustrates the level of consensus to some extent:"The finding that the climate has warmed in recent decades and that this warming is likely attributable to human influence has been endorsed by every national science academy that has issued a statement on climate change, including the science academies of all of the major industrialized countries. With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific society is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change"I agree with you about the huge carbon footprints of many of those speaking about the need to reduce CO2 emissions though - it definitely sends out the wrong message!I applaud your efforts to reduce your carbon footprint with greener bulbs and maybe soon a solar panel, and would love to see the same kind of commitment from the politicians who are actually going to be making the decisions on this very important issue.Thanks, Ben, for your input. Despite the disagreement on one point, I find your comment a balanced one. ~mogama~
A well-written, sad-but-true commentary on the disappointing Copenhagen Conference. Thank you, Mogama.Thanks, Carolyn, for your comment. ~mogama~
Oh, the irony of it all! Love your tie in with the snow storm - it was like a cherry on top. MarijoThanks, Marijo, for chipping in. I'm glad you enjoyed the read. ~mogama~
I couldn't agree more. It was funny to see Obama returning to a huge blizzard.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.