WILL THE GLOBAL WARMING RACKET REDUCE POLLUTION?

Of course not.

Truth is, climate change has nothing to do with smog or soot. Global warming is, in fact, blamed on invisible gases such as carbon dioxide.

But this is what we sceptics are now up against — warming believers who are red-hot with religion but stone-cold clueless on the science.

It’s not just the Pope, claiming they “believe the science” the way that Christians say they “believe in God”, and with the same inability to rationalise why.

The United Nations, run by the OIC,  is the most corrupt gang of entitled crooks  plotting and scamming the world for their own benefit. Unelected and unfettered totalitarian control of the world is their aim. The corruption bravely pointed out in this article is only the tip of the  iceberg, The West is being ripped off  to pay for all the sh*thole countries  that will never change.

Hypocritical and parasitical – when the truth is widely known and accepted that climate change as the IPCC portrays it, is a monumental scam.

The Very Model of a Global Green Rorter

Tony Thomas Quadrant Online 20th December 2018

That Third World cesspits sent hundreds — nay, thousands — of freeloading delegates to the latest catastrophist gabfest is, sadly, to be expected. But they have something of an excuse: when it comes to living high on the climate dollar, the UN’s Erik Solheim is the gold standard

From top to bottom, things don’t get more disgusting than at the UN Environment Program, which runs the UN’s anti-emissions campaign. Indeed, UNEP under its director Maurice Strong in 1988 co-founded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In 2005 Strong was caught red-handed at the UN with a $US988,000 cheque from a South Korean business man. Strong fled to the safety of Beijing — China has no extradition treaty with the US — and he lived there, honoured and unprosecuted, until his death in 2015.

Related:

Rich to pay poor in UN climate deal

Rich countries including Australia have agreed to consider paying more money to developing nations to help secure a global deal that brings the Paris Agreement to life….See more

Life at the top of UNEP is no longer so spectacular, but its latest director-general, Erik Solheim (above), had to resign last month when an internal audit exposed his rorting of travel and lifestyle costs. While preaching against CO2 emissions, he enjoyed aerial globetrotting for 529 days of 668 days (audited) since getting the job in 2016.

More of this rubbish:

Australia will use carry-over credits to meet 2030 emissions target

Ben Packham The Australian December 21, 2018

Australia will use carried-over emissions credits to achieve its 2030 Paris climate emissions target in a controversial move allowing Scott Morrison to justify his claim that the Paris target will be met “in a canter”.

See more

More of Solheim later, but let’s take a look now at the underbelly of UNEP’s COP24 at Katowice, a talkfest for 23,000 designed to save the planet and transfer at least $US100 billion a year, as of 2020, from the West to African and other Third World basket-cases. Numbers of these countries displayed their integrity by each flying literally hundreds of freeloaders to Poland, their travel and living costs disbursed from UN funds courtesy of UN donors, including Australia.

Resoures-rich Republic of Guinea in general fits the Trump definition of “a shithole country”. It’s 85% Muslim, 96-98% of women suffer genital mutilation, child marriage and illiteracy rates are among the world’s highest, 5% of women can expect death in childbirth, close to 40% of the population suffers malnutrition, and health threats range from HIV/AIDS to malaria and ebola. Only a quarter of the population has electricity, children are trafficked with impunity for sex and slavery, and after nine years, no security forces have been tried for a 2009 pre-election massacre of 156 people and rape of more than 100 women. Need it be said that the government is monstrously corrupt?

But in one respect Guinea is a world champion – the size of its delegations to UN climate change confabs. At COP24 in Katowice this month, freeloaders from Guinea comprised 406 of the 14,000 official delegates, easily outclassing Congo with only 237 and Ivory Coast with 208. Last year at COP23 in Bonn, Guinea sent 355, beaten by Ivory Coast with a stunning 492. At the Paris COP21, Guinea sent 398.

The Guinea total includes politicians, officials, and NGO people. They trooped to a special UN office at Katowice, presented passport and plane tickets, and collected their cash from a nearby bank window. How much allowed? For the minimum stay of 12 days, US2328 or $A3235. Last year in Germany, $A4914.

The mind reels at the delegate numbers: Sudan 172; Senegal 171; Benin 139; Chad 57. Our tiny Pacific neighbors, none of them climate-drowning, weren’t going to miss out: Fiji 60; Tonga 26; Vanuatu 23; Tuvalu 21; Timor Leste 21; PNG 19; Nauru 14. Australia sent 30 – all paid for by the government, not the UN.

Nature guru David Attenborough saw no irony in warning at the opening about “the collapse of civilisations” from too much CO2. Oh, the irony! The Katowice summit was itself estimated to emit an extra 55,000 tonnes of CO2, excluding the formidable emissions from delegates’ junketeering via scheduled flights or celebrity private jet. There was also the cost to Poland and the atmosphere of building virtually an entire new town for the 30,000 visitors. Those 55,000 tonnes emissions, by the way, equate with the annual emissions of about 8500 homes, 12,000 cars or 728 tanker-truck loads of petrol.

The UN’s face-saver is that it pays for CO2 offsets, in this case for planting 7 million trees in Poland. It also offers free lanyards to visitors who buy CO2 offsets. Good work, UN.

Erik the Rorter pauses between flights to urge reductions in global emissions.

A person might say of Guinea and Benin, “Well, that’s Africa for you.” But the worst cesspit of nation (to use a more genteel turn of phrase than that favoured by Trump) must be Norway, for hypocrisy. Its one-time (2007-12) environment minister and Socialist Left/Greens politician Erik Solheim moved in 2016 to run the UN Environment Program (UNEP) with its budget of $US780 million. UNEP operates as the “global environmental authority that sets the global environmental agenda.”

Solheim quit as executive director last month after being sprung by auditors for massive luxury travel and expense rorting. He totted up $US488,000 ($A 678,000) for 22 months travel, involving 80% of his workdays. There were also 76 days’ worth of unexplained sojourns in Oslo and Paris. On one weekend he flew Washington DC to Paris for a weekend’s relaxation, returning Paris-New York. Who was authorising such trips? One of Solheim’s subordinates – unusual, that.

UNEP headquarters are in Nairobi, but who would want to work there? So Solheim allowed two pet staff unofficial licence to work out of Paris instead, at a cost of $US23,000-plus in extra travel. Other managers told the press that Solheim had been “getting away with murder” with his “haphazard and dictatorial management style”.

A Norwegian company won business from UNEP last April and, shortly after, decided to hire his spouse, Gry Ulverud Solheim. Mr Solheim had to recuse himself from further dealings with the company and, in his official capacity, his missus.

Some US staff considered Solheim had grown far too chummy with China, and they were suspicious of Solheim’s environmental examinations of the Middle Kingdom’s vast Belt and Road project. He also made an unpublicised UNEP $US500,000 donation to the Volvo Ocean Race. At least the public knew where those yachts were going. UN Environment people in general were gadding about a lot, and their destinations and reasons remain something of a mystery. The auditors sought data on 596 staff trips, but 210 trips couldn’t be documented and another 200 had to be hastily documented post-audit. The UN internal preliminary audit was leaked to The Guardian UK. The full report is still not public.

Denmark, Sweden, Japan, Belgium and the Netherlands withheld some $US50 million in UNEP funding when they learnt of Solheim’s habits, threatening UNEP with a financial crisis. One wonders why Australia’s UNEP rep made no overt contribution to the fightback against top-level rorting.

Solheim initially maintained that he couldn’t be treated like at 7am-4pm factory worker and shouldn’t be asked “stupid questions” about his work arrangements. When the audit came out, Solheim led his top troops on a three-day soul-searching retreat. They just had time to agree on a “commitment to a set of principles to guide the way we work and interact”, before he bugged out of UNEP the next day.

The auditors said Solheim had “no regard for abiding by the set regulations and rules,” noting this was a “reputation risk” for an organisation dedicated to fighting climate change. Solheim’s behavior, they said, was “contrary to the ethos of carbon emission reduction.” The auditors drew attention to a 2011 policy UN statement that it would set an example of probity, including on environmental sustainability. These UN statements of good intent are a regular affair, just as are the exposures of UN corruption.

Solheim’s farewell: “As I have maintained throughout this process, I have been and remain committed to doing what I believe to be in the best interest of UN Environment and the mission we are here to achieve.

“For this reason, after deep reflection and in close consultation with the Secretary-General, I am stepping down.”

One would also think the UN Secretary-General António Guterres would be outraged by Solheim’s jet-about rorting. No, no, no. He waved him on his way with praise for the “transformational change needed to make a real difference in the lives of people and promote the cause of the environment.”

“The secretary general is grateful for Mr. Solheim’s service and recognises that he has been a leading voice in drawing the world’s attention to critical environmental challenges, including plastics pollution and circularity; climate action; the rights of environmental defenders; biodiversity; and environmental security,” the Secretary-General said.

Solheim says he will continue to fight for environmental causes. “I am sad to be leaving, as we have achieved so much together,” he told staff in a tweet. “I will continue to champion the cause of the environment!”

Whether it’s African parasites piling onto the annual climate junk-fests or the top UN climate man rorting the system silly, even the most fervent catastrophists must sometimes wonder at the company they keep.

https://quadrant.org.au/…/the-very-model-of-a-global-green…/

Image may contain: 1 person, text
More of this rubbish:

Businesses and workers pay a high price for zero emissions targets

Daniel Wild The Daily Telegraph December 20, 2018

Don Harwin is to be credited for his role as the state’s Minister for Energy and Utilities. But his recent suggestions for the future of energy and climate policy in Australia are misguided. This week Harwin touted the NSW government’s policy of net zero emissions by 2050, argued for the integration of climate and energy policy, and decried the lack of co-ope…

Continue reading

Liberal luvvies for higher power prices

Alan Moran The Spectator Australia December 20, 2018

Politicians as targets of the French gilets jaunes are omnipresent in Australia and have, with their climate change-driven energy policies, created even greater economic damage than in France. Notwithstanding the disastrous effects from subsidising renewable energy, politicians’ hubris within the Coalition, ALP and Greens leaves most MPs convinced that renewable energy is the future. …

Continue reading

Debunked, climate change myths with facts and science

Andrew Bolt, Herald Sun December 24, 2018

A letter in a newspaper last week blasted me for doubting. Didn’t I know Pope Francis had declared “the science of climate change was clear”? “Pope Francis, a man of faith, and Andrew Bolt’s opinion. No contest.” Wow. Not since the Catholic Church condemned Galileo has the Pope been cited as the ultimate arbiter of science.

Nor was this the only sign in this Christmas season that global warming has become our newest religion, with a real Pope to save us from the (man-made) fires of Hell.

Take the ominously named Australian Religious Response to Climate Change, which has rewritten 16 traditional carols to turn a festival devoted to the Saviour of men into a ceremony for saving the Earth.

Silent Night, Holy Night, for instance, has become Silent Night, Smoky Night.

But note the unscientific lie in that carol — that sighing over “smoky night”.

Truth is, climate change has nothing to do with smog or soot. Global warming is, in fact, blamed on invisible gases such as carbon dioxide.

But this is what we sceptics are now up against — warming believers who are red-hot with religion but stone-cold clueless on the science.

It’s not just the Pope, claiming they “believe the science” the way that Christians say they “believe in God”, and with the same inability to rationalise why.

Take Kerryn Phelps, now the ABC’s favourite politician after winning the Wentworth by-election as a far-Left independent.

Naturally, Phelps recited the warmists’ catechism on the ABC: “I believe in the science.”

But in her next breath, she contradicted the science to claim that man-made warming was causing “the imminent disappearance of island nations like Kiribati or Tuvalu”.

This is a claim endlessly repeated by warmists, yet no island nations are disappearing under rising seas.

Tuvalu has actually grown by 2.9 per cent over four decades. Betio, Kiribati’s most populous atoll, has grown 30 per cent in 60 years.

Professor Paul Kench studied 27 such atoll islands in the central Pacific, and concluded 43 per cent were growing, and just 14 per cent shrinking.

Here are other popular falsehoods that warmists fervently claim as true, only to get cross when I quote back “the science” they claim to “believe” in.

—Global warming is happening as predicted.

In fact, warming has slowed dramatically since last century, giving us lower temperatures than predicted by the vast majority of warming models. (Source: Dr Roy Spencer.)

— Global warming is causing more and worse cyclones.

In fact, Australia has had fewer cyclones, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change this year admitted “numerous studies … have reported a decreasing trend in the global number of tropical cyclones and/or the globally accumulated cyclonic energy”.

— Global warming is causing more drought.

In fact, rainfall in Australia has increased over the past century. The IPCC now admits it has “low confidence in the sign of drought trends since 1950 at global scale”.

— Polar bears are becoming extinct.

In fact, adjunct professor Susan Crockford estimates numbers jumped from 22,500 to 28,500 over a decade.

— Global warming means less food.

In fact, grain crops in Australia and the world have set several records over the past decade.

But 97 per cent of climate scientists say global warming is real and man-made.

In fact, that figure has been widely debunked. True, most scientists nevertheless believe climate change is real (who doesn’t) and that man’s emissions tend to make the Earth warmer.

But the rest is debatable: what difference do our emissions make; is warming bad; is it worth the pain to “stop” warming?

“Man-made climate change does not appear to be a serious problem,” declares Richard Lindzen, arguably the world’s most famous climate scientist until he retired from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Thinking the world’s temperature was driven primarily by man’s tiny emissions “borders on magical thinking”, he added.

Another eminent climate scientist, Judith Curry, says there’s no evidence that man’s emissions are causing seas to rise faster than they were doing already, after the end of the Little Ice Age, “and thinking that we can really control the climate by dialling down the CO2 emissions is really misguided hubris”.

Indeed, as Chief Scientist Alan Finkel admits, any cuts that Australia makes to its emissions would have “virtually no” effect on the temperature, because we’re just too small.

I know lots of people get angry when I mention these facts, but all I have done here is quote “the science”.

So do warmists truly “believe the science” or not?

1/ Melbourne’s has experienced some crazy weather events. Picture: Alex Coppel.

Image may contain: one or more people, sky and outdoor