Canada blocks Commonwealth climate-change deal

[noahbody]

What was the Liberal's plan while they were in government?

I think it was called Pass the Buck.

[capricorn]

I read negative comments on another thread here about Christophe Monckton. Yet I found this article he wrote interesting given the criticisms that have been directed at the IPCC. Monckton is in the "do nothing" camp for reasons he explains in his article.

Here are snippets.

"The shore-dwellers of Bali need not fear for their homes. The IPCC now says the combined contribution of the two great ice-sheets to sea-level rise will be less than seven centimeters after 100 years, not seven meters imminently, and that the Greenland ice sheet (which thickened by 50 cm between 1995 and 2005) might only melt after several millennia, probably by natural causes, just as it last did 850,000 years ago. Gore, mendaciously assisted by the IPCC bureaucracy, had exaggerated a hundredfold."

"At the very heart of the IPCC’s calculations lurks an error more serious than any of these. The IPCC says: “The CO2 radiative forcing increased by 20 percent during the last 10 years (1995-2005).” Radiative forcing quantifies increases in radiant energy in the atmosphere, and hence in temperature. The atmospheric concentration of CO2 in 1995 was 360 parts per million. In 2005 it was just 5percent higher, at 378 ppm. But each additional molecule of CO2 in the air causes a smaller radiant-energy increase than its predecessor. So the true increase in radiative forcing was 1 percent, not 20 percent. The IPCC has exaggerated the CO2 effect 20-fold."

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=22430

Maybe this guy's out to lunch, I don't know. Yet, IMO his views are no more outrageous than Gore's.

Like many, this back and forth arguing between the opposing camps on global warming/climate change has me totally confused. In the scale between the hysterics of a looming apocalypse and dismissive naysayers, I find myself somewhere in between.

I am very suspicious about the true motives of the likes of Al Gore, David Suzuki, the UN, Maurice Strong and others in this whole climate change puzzle. Nothing I have seen or heard has assuaged this suspicion. The truth is out there somewhere and I don't think it will come out at the Bali conference.

[capricorn]

Here are excerpts of what the UN said at Bali.

"If we leave Bali without such a breakthrough, we will not only have failed our leaders but also those who look to us to find solutions, namely the peoples of this world," Ban said.

"This is the moral challenge of our generation. Not only are the eyes of the world upon us. More important, succeeding generations depend on us. We cannot rob them of their future."

"If you fail to act, the consequences of climate change can plunge the world into conflict," added Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which is running the 12-day conference.

"In 2010, there could be already as many as 50 million environmentally-displaced persons due to climate change, desertification and deforestation. Competing for water, energy and food can lead to ethnic rivalry and regional conflicts."

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iQBwEu...CFG8glqMdGPBWGg

I can't help but think that the UN is trying desperately to sell the idea that this issue is so critical to the planet that it may lead to what amounts to a global war. No doubt the UN's predictions will strike fear in the hearts of many ordinary people. Fear is a great motivator and it may very well work.

I'm one that has lost confidence on the UN as a competent body that can direct the world in solving problems. This lack of credibility which is shared by many will make it difficult to convince the international community that it has the answers. I think this is at the heart of the problems at the Bali conference, i.e, finding common ground to move forward with an agreement....any agreement.

[jbg]

I am very suspicious about the true motives of the likes of Al Gore, David Suzuki, the UN, Maurice Strong and others in this whole climate change puzzle. Nothing I have seen or heard has assuaged this suspicion. The truth is out there somewhere and I don't think it will come out at the Bali conference.

I don't think Gore wants to discuss his business ties with carbon-credit trading. Ditto Strong and/or the UN. I don't know if Suzuki is motivated by hypocritical profits or not.