Apocalyptic forecasts increase as climate change conference draws near

Despite recent terrorist attacks, Paris is expecting the convergence of 40,000 delegates, journalists, and non-governmental organizations at the next United Nations’ climate change conference to be held November 30-December 11, 2015.
This is the BIG ONE under the United Framework Convention of Climate Change UNFCCC Conference of the Parties COP 21.  The global warming alarmists expect this conference to produce a legally binding document making industrialized countries eliminate fossil fuels from their energy and pay reparations to developing countries for damages caused by climate change.
They want to create a carbon neutral society.  Of course, this is not possible since every human produces CO2 with every breath.  CO2 is the breath of life.
The apocalyptic forecast is humans produce too much CO2 in the atmosphere from over consumptive lifestyles which is in turn produces global warming.  And, according to the alarmists, Earth must not be allowed to warm more than 2 degrees Celsius or all living things will die.
COP 16 held in Copenhagen, Denmark in 2009 was supposed to be the conference putting all of this into play, especially since Barack Hussein Obama had just been elected, but the conference was a bust.  It was a draw between the U.S. and China.  So the UNFCCC had to begin a new propaganda program to convince the world of the looming global warming crisis finally culminating in COP 21. 
There have been two persistent problems.  First, the world has been experiencing worldwide recession and people are much more concerned with paying bills than global warming.  Second, the planet is no longer getting warmer.  According to satellite readings (one of the most accurate ways to determine global temperatures), Earth has had no significant warming since 1998.
Climate change alarmism never stops and has increased over the last six months as COP21 draws near.  Endless newspaper articles tell us this is the hottest year or month on record.  Every weather extreme, even those days with the coldest recorded temperatures, are blamed on global warming. 
Bill Gates and Pope Francis tell us capitalism is the reason for climate change.  There is even a new mental disorder brought about by the crisis called “climate advocacy trauma.”
If all of this isn’t enough to insult our intelligence, President Obama tells us climate change “constitutes a serious threat to global security” and “it will impact how the military defends our country.”  Never mind the threat of ISIS.  Secretary of State, John Kerry says climate change carries the same global threat as the “proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.”  It’s really unsettling to think these men are the leaders of the most powerful country in the world.
Dr. Richard Lindzen, a world renowned meteorologist who received his PhD. from Harvard; was reviewer and contributing author for the first and second Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC Scientific Assessments and lead author on the third assessment, but does not believe in anthropogenic (human-induced) global warming, says that most scientists whether skeptic or believer agree that global warming will not create a catastrophic event.  He says the “catastrophic narrative” is due totally to the politicians and the environmentalists.
He cited Mike Hulme, Director of Tyndall Center at the University of East Anglia and a strong global warming advocate saying, “To state that climate change will be ‘catastrophic’ hides a cascade of value-laden assumptions which do not emerge from empirical or theoretical science.”
Advocate, Gavin Schmidt, Jim Hansen’s successor as head of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies says about extreme weather, “General statements about extremes are almost nowhere to be found in the literature but….abound in the popular media….if anyone thinks about that for 10 seconds they realize that’s nonsense.”
The argument for climate change is also lost in the fact that CO2 emissions are on the rise while at the same time global temperatures remain stable proving there is no cause and effect.  The increase of CO2 does not cause global warming.
The UNFCCC has created a financial atonement for attendees feeling guilty about leaving a large carbon footprint traveling to Paris.   They simply need to log into
a website called Climate Neutral and make a purchase of carbon credits.
Once logged in, travel can be calculated.  Traveling coach creates less CO2 emissions than traveling business class.  Flying coach from DFW to Paris creates 1065.75 Kg of CO2 and flying Business creates 2131.51 Kg of CO2.  Once the CO2 emissions are known, a project can be selected like a wind or solar project which is supposedly being built in a third world country.  These projects cost anywhere from $1.00-$4.00 a Tonne.  Selecting 900 Tonnes at $1.95 for a wind project costs  $1755.00 plus a 19% tax of $333.45 with a grand total of $2088.45.
There are disclaimers attached to this website stating the UNFCCC is not responsible is a project is not completed.  If a delegate purchases a carbon credit, they will be given a free booklet at the conference on other projects.
As I travel to Paris, my conscience will be completely clear and of course, Obama will feel no guilt as he flies Air Force One to COP21.
If  COP 21 is successful, it will give Obama the final tools to transform America into a third world economy.
Categories

About the Author: Pat Carlson

Pat Carlson

  • Brin Jenkins

    In the 1971 I had a short dalliance with a rather sexy miss, who initiated into the Green Peace organisation. I had interest in energy conservation and recovery, so perhaps I was a greenie in those Hippy days although I also ran my own business.

    Transport was discussed, and I spoke of my interest in Airships, I just loved them and still do. I envisaged a giant saucer that never landed, where goods and passengers might be loaded and disembarked by docking ferries in mid air. Really not a practical proposition but I was still encouraged to make drawings and arrange a presentation of this crazy scheme with a solar powered turbine propulsion unit. With my slide rule and research I soon dismissed the idea and dropped it.

    I think many greenies are still in that place today, but unable to ditch their daft ideas.

    • JOHNBOY11

      in the early 70’s we were going into an ice age?? n.est pas

      • CB

        “in the early 70’s we were going into an ice age?? n.est pas”

        N’est-ce pas, indeed!

        This is one of many dishonest Climate Denier talking points intentionally crafted by the fossil fuel industry to mislead people about the dangerous nature of their product.

        Is it possible there are people out there who still don’t know this by now?

        “There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age. Indeed, the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then.”

        journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1

        “CFACT has received over $4.1 million in funds from Donor’s Trust and Donor’s Capital Fund between 2002-2011, plus an additional $582,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998-2012”

        http://www.desmogblog.com/committee-constructive-tomorrow

        • JOHNBOY11

          Big al made how much and lives what size carbon mansion??

          • CB

            “Big al made how much and lives what size carbon mansion??”

            I don’t even know what you’re talking about!

            That’s how disconnected from reality you are…

            Why don’t you address the issue instead of describing your favourite cartoon:

            Are humans warming the planet, John?

            What do you think?

            “Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.”

            climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus

  • Dano2

    Earth has had no significant warming since 1998

    Comical.

    best,

    D

    • david russell

      Anyone can look at the chart and see NO WARMING since 1998. Of course you can create the illusion of warming by drawing lines. Warmists are good at illusion.

    • david russell

      Anyone can read this chart (well, anyone but you). It shows no warming since 1998.

  • Dano2

    The increase of CO2 does not cause global warming.

    Hilarious. Earth has a NewPhysics, something extraordinary that happens only on earth and nowhere else in the universe, everybody!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

    Best,

    D

    • Otter

      Yes, there has been a new physics for some 30 years now. It backs the theory of ‘man-made’ global warming, which is somehow all catastrophic, all the time.

      • Dano2

        You can’t deflect away from that derptastical italicized.

        Best,

        D

        • Brin Jenkins

          Really? Why not explain your understanding in your own words. Otherwise why should anyone believe a guy that’s unable to explain his own fervent belief? If you are unable to, then perhaps it’s just all made up on the hoof. If you can show me the mechanism for CO2 heating, perhaps that list of scientists might also be swayed. Silly comments like “drink” are unimpressive as is the haha diarrhea, What garbage is lolized supposed to mean? That’s not even funny, just pathetic floundering in ignorance.

          • Dano2

            Why keep pretending I haven’t?

            Best,

            D

            • Brin Jenkins

              A number of folk differ from your point which you persist is correct. Humor me and please re-present your explanation. You’re missing an opportunity to demonstrate your scientific understanding.

              I think you show by your reticence you are unable to.

              • Dano2

                A number of folk differ from your point

                None of these folk have any education, so it doesn’t matter what they think.

                CO2 is a greenhouse gas that absorbs and reradiates long-wave radiation, when radiated downward it results in warming the planet. Without GHGs the planet would be ~33C colder. This effect was discovered in the 1850s and a Nobel was awarded for work done in 1896 to calculate how much warming would result from a doubling of CO2, so mankind has known about the greenhouse effect for well over a century – denying it is inane.

                I’ve bookmarked this comment so when you play this game again I’ll just refer back to this link.

                Best,

                D

                • Brin Jenkins

                  Ah got it now, you are the Climate Messiah who knows, but is unable to explain!.

                  You have never explained, and have no explanation or you would do so now.

                  Is there any wonder folk have so little regard for your Bolshevik views?

                  • Dano2

                    I have already explained – just upthread. You lack ability to grasp it.

                    Best,

                    D

    • david russell

      Additional CO2 has a warming effect, just not much of one. During the almost 2 most recent decades of your above chart humans increased CO2 emissions by 50 percent with effectively no warming AT ALL.

      • Dano2

        no warming AT ALL.

        HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

        That’s good comedy!

        I LOLzed!

        Best,

        D

        • david russell

          Well, it’s your chart. That’s what it shows. You sound deranged. I’m surely not the first to notice that.

          • Dano2
            • david russell

              You are repeating yourself. Take a Roll-Aid. Same chart…. shows no warming since 1998. All but you see it. Only you are laughing (well, some are snickering…. at you).

              • Dano2

                Wow.

                The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one. And the inability to do statistics.

                Best,

                D

                • david russell

                  You don’t know what cognitive dissonance is…..among your many other failings.

                  • Dano2

                    You are utterly lacking capacity to support such assertions. Anyone can look at the charts and wonder why you tell yourself little stories. IME it is usually a combination of the good feels and cognitive dissonance abeyance. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6abda8af08f53ac08c60d3efcd3c0efeb3db24808488d751aad40520b777c75a.jpg

                    Best,

                    D

                    • david russell

                      I’d say you are the one experiencing cognitive dissonance. The chart shows no warming since1998 and you deny it. Cognitive dissonance requires 2 incompatible beliefs. That’s you, Pal.
                      Anyone can confirm for themselves that there’s been no global warming for over 18 years according to satellite records, merely by Googling “no global warming 18 years.” You can even view images of similar charts to yours above, but showing horizontal lines.
                      What a twit you are.

                    • Dano2

                      The chart shows no warming since1998 and you deny it.

                      The chart shows how dishonest it is to use that start date. And you triple-down on your dishonesty.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      The chart shows no such thing. You are just a blind dogmatist for climate alarmism. That start date is merely the answer to the question: “How far back can you go to be able to honestly claim that there’s been no global warming since that date?” And the answer is obvious. Anyone can see it (except you).
                      You may notice in Google that you can find links to “no global warming 15 years” and “no….16 years”, and “no…. 17 years” and “no …. 18 years.” The years tick off and there continues to be no global warming.
                      Give it up. Your position is in tatters.

                    • Dano2

                      You can’t bluff your way out of it.

                      best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      I see you don’t know what a bluff is either. You are such a dolt. Lucky for you no one is on this thread.

                    • Dano2

                      Derptastic.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      I see that I have reduced you to gibberish.

                    • Dano2

                      Joke’s on you.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      In addition to being a know-nothing doofus, you are also … not funny. You are a clown, of course, but not one of the funny kind.

                    • Dano2

                      That won’t hide your comical ineptness regarding the charts either.

                      best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      Blah, blah, blah. You are dismissed.

                    • Dano2

                      That won’t hide your ineptitude either.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      Yes. You are the Ernest P Whorl of the internet. You just get dumber and dumber and dumber with each post. How low can you go? Where is the bottom of this vast barrel of ignorance you keep scraping the bottom of?

                    • Dano2

                      Hmmm…. *looks upthread*…nope. Your ineptitude is still upthread. This latest didn’t hide it either. Good job trying, though! You tried! Good job trying!

                      Best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      “looks upthread”…. more gibberish.

                    • Dano2

                      Wow…hmmmm…nope. That derp didn’t hide it either. You should try another tactic to hide your derpitude upthread, cuz what you’re doing isn’t working.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      More gibberish. I must really be getting under your skin.

                • david russell

                  Dano2 is daft as his above 2 comments demonstrate. Pay him no heed.

              • JS
                • david russell

                  This is a chart of ocean heat content. But the oceans are warmed by the sun, not CO2 back-radiation, which cannot penetrate more than 3 microns of the top layer of the ocean skin. Since the ocean skin is cooler than the layers beneath, it cannot warm the lower layers (2nd law).

                  • JS
                    • david russell

                      No one reads that fraud John Cook any more (skepticalscience.com). He’s a liar and a charlatan, as his “97% of scientists…..” paper demonstrates — totally debunked.
                      Despite variations in insolation, the oceans are warmed from above by the sun, not CO2 back-radiation. What the sun is doing 93mm miles away is NOT the right metric. What is the right metric is the amount of solar radiation hitting the planet, specifically the oceans, which is an artifact of BOTH insolation incoming AND atmospheric conditions, — mainly aerosol’s, and cloud cover.
                      So for example, decreased world-wide cloud cover explains recent warming of the oceans despite tiny variations in solar output.

                    • Dano2

                      Cook totem!

                      Drink!

                      Best,

                      D

                  • Dano2

                    Whoa. Either a random commenter just took down an entire subdiscipline of oceanography, or is wrong….

                    Hmmmm….what to think….what to think….what to thinnnnnnnnnnnk….

                    Best,

                    D

                    • david russell

                      What sub-discipline of oceanography would that be, pray tell, doofus-Dano2?
                      Try not to think. You don’t have the equipment. It’s painful to read you prattle. Why not just dry up and blow away?

                    • Dano2

                      Weak bombast to cover deficiencies is weak.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      So you don’t know “what sub-set of oceanography” I “took down,” do you? And that means you don’t know what you are talking about. And that means you are a stupid twit.
                      …..but everyone knows that.

                    • Dano2

                      Try to read what I wrote, then….erm….”think” it thru.

                      We know you are confoosid cuz all the namie-names you type.

                      best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      Here are some of the things you wrote, actually the last 6 things you wrote…. all gibberish or content-less blather:

                      1. “Weak bombast to cover deficiencies is weak”

                      2. “Whoa. Either a random commenter just took down an entire subdiscipline of oceanography, or is wrong….

                      3. “Hmmmm….what to think….what to think….what to thinnnnnnnnnnnk…..”

                      4. “no warming AT ALL.

                      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

                      That’s good comedy!

                      I LOLzed!

                      Best,

                      D”

                      5. “That’s good comedy.

                      Best,

                      D”

                      And of course, your latest nonsense:

                      6. “Try to read what I wrote, then….erm….”think” it thru.

                      We know you are confoosid cuz all the namie-names you type.

                      best,

                      D”

                    • Dano2

                      You are looking for different reactions to your Internet Performance Art skits?

                      Maybe you need to work on your prompts if I didn’t give the reactions you wanted to keep the skit going. Have your drama teacher help you if you can’t find a good tutorial. Old Daily Show interviews with Carrell are good too, to see how they work off of each other.

                      HTH

                      Best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      More gibberish. Is there no bottom to this morass of nonsense you seem to be mining?

                    • Dano2

                      I’m mirror-matching.

                      Best,

                      D

                    • david russell

                      Once again, you don’t know what you are talking about.

                    • Dano2

                      Oh, yes: I’m mirror-matching.

                      Best,

                      D

    • JOHNBOY11

      If it gets warmer our furnacas won,t run as much//reducing our output of your scary carbon. Think we could grow pineapples in ct

  • Mervyn

    Never before have so many lies been told – about an alleged problem relating to a false theory – by so many deceitful people including an American president, in order to drive a political agenda based on an abuse of science to achieve their ideological goal.

    • Dano2

      False theory! Hoot!

      Best,

      D

      • CB

        “False theory!”

        …that’s survived over a century of scrutiny!

        It makes perfect sense if you (don’t) think about it…

        /s

        “The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century”

        climate.nasa.gov/evidence

        • JOHNBOY11

          Follow the money///whom gets grant agree with this tripe???

  • calhou

    The only apocalypse will be the one manufactured by the statists and foisted on the public in order to accomplish through fear and lies, what cannot be accomplished through freedom and logic. The third world wants the US to give them money……and lots of it. Obama is happy to roll over. Yet the national debt is at $19 Trillion…….headed to $20 trillion…….where the hell are we supposed to come up with it?