re-9: global warming – Copenhagen


Richard Moore


Here are two very revealing reports on the Copenhagen conference:
Fidel Castro: The truth about what happened at Copenhagen
Globalist version of what happened in Copenhagen

Castro gives a blow-by-blow journalistic account of what actually happened. He reports:

From the evening of December 17 and the early morning hours of December 18, the prime minister of Denmark and senior representatives of the United States had been meeting with the chairperson of the European Commission and the leaders of 27 nations to introduce to them — on behalf of Obama — a draft agreement in whose elaboration none of the other leaders of the rest of the world had taken part.

… A small number of countries firmly insisted on the grave omissions and ambiguities of the document promoted by the United States, particularly the absence of a commitment by the developed countries on the reduction of carbon emissions and on the financing that would allow the global South countries to adopt alleviating and adjustment measures.
After a long and extremely tense discussion, the position of the ALBA countries and Sudan, as president of the G-77, prevailed that the document was unacceptable to the conference thus it could not be adopted.
In view of the absence of consensus, the conference could only “take note” of the existence of that document representing the position of a group of about 25 countries.

In the globalist version, we get a grossly falsified account of these same events:

The [UK] climate secretary, Ed Miliband, today accuses China, Sudan, Bolivia and other leftwing Latin American countries of trying to hijack the UN climate summit and “hold the world to ransom” to prevent a deal being reached.
The prime minister, Gordon Brown, will repeat some of the UK’s accusations in a webcast tomorrow when he says: “Never again should we face the deadlock that threatened to pull down [those] talks. Never again should we let a global deal to move towards a greener future be held to ransom by only a handful of countries.”

To the Guardian’s credit, they don’t endorse this account. Their article goes on, more in agreement with Castro’s remarks:
But in what threatened to become an international incident, diplomats and environment groups hit back by saying Britain and other countries, including the US and Australia, had dictated the terms of the weak Copenhagen agreement, imposing it on the world’s poor “at the peril of the millions of common masses”. 

But of course it is Gordon Brown’s statements that will get the most media coverage in Britain. It is from Brown that we can see what the post-Copenhagen propaganda line will be. What does all this mean? Here’s how I see it…

First, we know what kind of climate-change deal the Bilderberger crowd want. They want a deal that doesn’t place any restrictions on the rich nations, but is draconian for the poor nations. Clearly they knew such a deal wouldn’t be accepted in Copenhagen. So with all the hoopla, pretending they hoped for agreement in Copenhagen, they now say it was the poor countries that ‘held the world ransom’. 

When Brown says, “Never again should we face the deadlock”, he clearly means that he wants to set up a system where the rich nations can impose their will on the rest. In other words, a global government controlled by the Bilderberger crowd. Lots of us are not at all surprised by this, but it’s now been spelled out rather clearly. The public concern created by the global warming scam is being channeled into creating a world government. We won’t get any meaningful reductions in Co2 emissions, because they know global warming isn’t really a problem. But we’ll get carbon taxes and carbon rationing, and they’ll get huge profits from their cap-and-trade bubble scam. 

The best scientific overview of the climate issue I’ve seen is this one, sent to me by Patricia Tursi:
Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus
Richard S. Lindzen
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The best single article I’ve seen on the temperature data, is this one:
Hockey stick observed in NOAA ice core data
J. Storrs Hall
Foresight Institute

This is the article whose accuracy I checked by downloading the official data into Excel and reproducing the graphs. If anyone knows where I can download ice-core temperature data for other locations, PLEASE let me know.



subscribe mailto:



Moderator: •••@••.•••  (comments welcome)