Climate Scam – The New Attempt At Wealth Redistribution
Posted by Tory Aardvark
IPCC Lead Author Myles Allen is back, after recently defending champagne environmentalist Will.I.Am for his personal hip.hop.copter, where Allen said:
“The irony didn’t escape everybody. But he’s committed to the issues and he’s written songs about it.”
“A better understanding of the problems is probably more important than whether Will flies a helicopter from London to Oxford.”
Well this is the warming alarmist industry, and an IPCC lead author is involved so hypocrisy will always abound.
When Al Gores excruciating ClimateReality project saw the light of day in December 2011 Allen was ready with criticism about Gore and his penchant for attributing extreme weather events to Anthropogenic Global Warming:
When Al Gore said last week that scientists now have “clear proof that climate change is directly responsible for the extreme and devastating floods, storms and droughts that displaced millions of people this year,” my heart sank.
In the post Rio+20 world with the climate scam in total disarray, no chance of the $100 billion Climate Fund ever happening, the warming alarmists have now decided that event attribution is the way forward, and the new scam for wealth redistribution will be called “loss and damage”.
This week also saw a workshop in Oxford for climate change negotiators from developing countries. Again, nothing remarkable about that except, for the first time, the issue of “loss and damage” was top of the agenda. For years negotiations have been over emission reductions and sharing the costs of adaptation. Now the debate is turning to: who is going to pay for damage done?
The immediate question has to be how can it be proved for example that a specific company caused the pollution that for example caused a landslide in Colombia?
On past performance the UN and Green ecomentalists will probably assign original guilt to the developed nations, which of course can be quantified and will doubtless come to the sum of $100 billion dollars.
Connecting climate change and specific weather events is only one link in the causal chain between greenhouse gas emissions and actual harm. But it is a crucial link. If, as planned, the assessment of 2011 becomes routine, we should be able to compare actual weather-related damage, in both good years and bad, with the damage that might have been in a world without human influence on climate. This puts us well on our way to a global inventory of climate change impacts. And as soon as that is available, the question of compensation will not be far behind.
Comparing good years and bad, that statement covers a myriad number of sins, expect the UN to be footing the bill for new cherry pickers for James Hansen and the IPCC.
The presumption in climate change negotiations is that “countries with historically high emissions” would be first in line to foot the bill for loss and damage.
Countries with historically high emissions, no big surprises there, the Liberals have assigned the guilt and as usual costed it, $100 billion dollars.
So rather than haggling over emission caps and carbon taxes, why not start with a simple statement of principle: standard product liability applies to anyone who sells or uses fossil fuels, including liability for any third-party side-effects. There is no need at present to say what these side-effects might be – indeed, the scientific community does not yet know. But we are getting there.
A limited number of scientists with a Green and or socialist agenda have still not learnt that crying wolf all the time gets you ignored, so these political activists will continue to try and blame any event on Anthropogenic Global Warming and pour forth still more fear stories.
The evidence as usual contradicts the Green propaganda, between 1900 – 2010 deaths from extreme weather event declined 98% despite a four-fold rise in population:
Deaths and death rates from droughts, which were responsible for approximately 60% of cumulative deaths due to extreme weather events from 1900–2010, are more than 99.9% lower than in the 1920s.
Deaths and death rates for floods, responsible for over 30% of cumulative extreme weather deaths, have declined by over 98% since the 1930s.
Deaths and death rates for storms (i.e. hurricanes, cyclones, tornados, typhoons), responsible for around 7% of extreme weather deaths from 1900–2008, declined by more than 55% since the 1970s.
The Greens and environmental fascists had 20 years to pull their scam off, and despite billions of dollars, stupid politicians and mainstream media collusion they spectacularly failed to make the Green Dream a reality, something we should all be truly thankful for.
There was no chance of ever securing a global agreement on CO2 emissions, the chances of pulling off the event attribution and the original guilt scam are even less, the loss and damage meme is just a watered down version of an attempt to make Ecocide a crime at Rio+20, and that idea just like Rio+20, crashed and burned.
About Tory AardvarkClimate Realist, Conservative and proud NRA member. I don't buy into the Man Made Global Warming Scam, science is never settled. http://toryaardvark.com @ToryAardvark on Twitter ToryAardvark on Facebook
Posted on July 11, 2012, in Anthropogenic Global Warming, Church Of Climatology, Climate Change, Global Warming, Green Lies, Green Taxation, Population Control, Social Engineering, Wealth Redistribution and tagged Loss and Damage, Myles Allen, One World Government. Bookmark the permalink. 2 Comments.