The Trump team was an Obama retread at the climate summit

The Greens are giving great thanks for how cooperative the Trump team of negotiators was at the Bonn climate conference. In reality there was no Trump negotiating team. We noted earlier that one of the top negotiators was an Obama man with a deep green background, including working for the radical enviro-group Earthjustice.

Well it turns out that the whole team has worked out that way. In fact the green press has noted with satisfaction the “continuity” between the Trump team’s position on critical issues and the positions of the prior Obama teams. In short these were Obama-era people with Obama-era ideologies. There looks not to have been a Trump person among them.

This is clearly the State Department’s fault, but it is easy enough to explain. State is an “old boy’s” club, one that tries hard not to respond to Administration leadership. CFACT readers who are familiar with the British TV comedy series — “Yes, Minister” — will know just how this goes. It is very funny to watch the entrenched bureaucrats deftly keep the new Minister of their Department from making changes.

It is far less funny to see the US State Department supporting the UN climate agenda of world domination through energy policy. Perhaps it is no coincidence that Yes, Minister ran during the early Reagan Administration.

Here is how the green Climate Home news service sums it up:

Negotiators inside the rooms pointed to a “less visible” US delegation. But the Obama-era diplomats remained “engaged” and made “judicious” interventions along the same lines they have taken for years.

A senior developing country negotiator said: “They are less visible than they used to be, but their priorities are clear. There’s a strong sense of continuity.”

This continuity of personnel and priorities is part of what insulates the climate regime from outside shocks. Countries work in blocks, meaning that national politics is diluted. The diplomats who conduct this work are mostly familiar faces, even friends. This community effect shouldn’t be underestimated. They have a lot of skin in this game and care deeply for each other and the process.

In short there was no Trump policy or position in sight. The so-called American team was completely insulated from the “outside shock” of the new Trump Administration. Blame the State Department, especially including Secretary Tillerson. Personally I would fire him if I were President Trump. This is a very big ball to drop.

Fortunately there is still a long way to go to for the Paris Agreement. The next summit is a year away, when the Paris Plan rulebook is supposed to be finished. There will be several key meetings before then.

Let’s hope that some Trump people can find their way to the negotiating table, to finally stand up for America, because America was never there at the Bonn climate summit.

Categories

About the Author: David Wojick, Ph.D.

David Wojick is a journalist and policy analyst. He holds a doctorate in epistemology, specializing in the field of Mathematical Logic and Conceptual Analysis.

  • pkwz

    Trump isn’t stupid. When the time comes, he’ll act. Flushing all of the #$!! out of the Federal Government takes time and more than a little bowl cleaner.

    • Li D

      Trumps the friggen new international standard for stupid.
      Absolutly ever single person can see this except the muppets who support him, who are pretty much either far right scum, or prepared to be seen walking along side far right scum.
      One can tell a man by who he walks with.
      Nice way to support the WW2 veterans eh? Walking with neo nazi scum to support Trump.

      • pkwz

        You don’t even know that The War was WWII, not WW2. And I know more about the American fighting man in The War than you as my father was a decorated infantryman in the U.S. Army who fought in Italy and France. He came home on a hospital ship with 3 Purple Hearts.

        Americans saved the world from tyranny back then and the pity now is that idiots like you infect the free world. Americans aren’t going to let a bunch of liberal/leftest/communists flush their country down the toilet.

        So go off and sing praises to your windmills. The adults in the room will be celebrating Thanksgiving tomorrow by BURNING billions of gallons of fossil fuels!

        • Immortal600

          God bless your Dad. Mine was on Iwo Jima as a marine (5th marine div.)

          • cshorey

            Why can’t you live up to your dad then? Stop lying for your ideology.

            • Immortal600

              Why can’t you get a life and a clue.

              • cshorey

                Because you’re the cause of future suffering and I love calling you out on your ignorant lies. Now, tell me how a sealed car in a sunny parking lot warms up please. You’ve been asked this simple question over and over. You think AGW can’t happen because of the second law of thermodynamics, so explain how it actually works in the car, and we’ll see if we can lead you from there to the real physics of the atmosphere.

                • Immortal600

                  The only people lying about climate change are goof balls like you. You think you understand something you clearly don’t and it bugs you that you can’t convince others to believe the garbage you do.

                • socalpa

                  I think it will be fun to chime in here ,cshorey , as I enjoy exposing the ignorance and hostility of alarmist trolls like you .
                  .
                  I call your type , Climate Schemers . like it ? It applies to those who support charging Trillions today , for (maybe) better weather in 2100AD .
                  .
                  cshorey Immortal600 • 8 hours ago

                  “Because you’re the cause of future suffering” ?
                  .
                  Have a Time Machine report to back that up ,schemer ? Are you aware of the increases in energy poverty rate across the EU and UK ? How about the increases in the excess winter death rates ? Do you know both correspond directly with the introduction of massive electric and fuel carbon taxes added since 2000 ? Does energy poverty requiring choosing between heat and food count as suffering ?
                  .
                  Answer those ,and we can discuss your car vs atmosphere nonsense ,

                  • Immortal600

                    I find it interesting that the idiot, cshorey, keeps asking about the car problem. Gerlich and Tscheuschner use that exact example in showing that there is no “greenhouse” effect. He should look at their PEER-REVIEWED paper (which has NOT been refuted. One person tried and they responded to him convincingly). Of course the advanced math would be beyond his capability of understanding.

                  • cshorey

                    Yes, answer is dependent on the understanding of energy poverty and how pollution is incorporated, need reference, need references, context please. And now, go try to find the origins of the conversation between me and Immoral to figure out why it might not be nonsense before commenting on what you are obviously not aware of.

        • cshorey

          WWII can’t be called WW2 as many people have through the years? Wow, your arguments are the bottom of the barrel. And that last paragraph, blaming people for living in the context of their world. You are the Tweedle Dumber. Sorry, Immortal is just a bit better.

  • Ron C.

    My thought is similar to pkwz. Why get embroiled in a messy diplomatic conflict when this whole thing could collapse of its own weight? The EU is struggling with Germany and with Brexit, not to mention Catalonia, in no position to progress, and China expects to be a taker, not a donor of climate funds.

    BTW David, here is an interesting call for increasing school choice against progressive educational indoctrination.

    https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2017/11/21/school-choice-antidote-to-indoctrination/

    • David Wojick

      Given that the next Democrat President can jump back into the Paris Agreement, and that we are still in it, I think we should defend American interests. If UN alarmism is going to fall from its own weight I would like to be part of that weight.

      Interesting school stuff. I have a lot on this here:
      https://www.gofundme.com/climate-change-debate-education
      and here:
      http://ccdedu.blogspot.com/.

      My goal is to create a comprehensive website that provides skeptical climate science teaching materials for teachers, parents and students. Right now there is none, but there are dozens promoting alarmism.

      • Immortal600

        Dr. Wojick, thank you for all you do in the fight against the AGW farce. May God bless you and your family.

        • cshorey

          David, Immortal would like to date you apparently. You should give the dolt some more attention. Immortal does slightly rank above pkwz in intelligence after all.

          • Immortal600

            I am in your head rent-free, I see.

      • cshorey

        There is currently no bullshit to hand out? Have you not seen the crap sent out by Heartland? All my educator friends love making fun of that junk pseudoscience. Thanks for the leads on the science disinformation sites you’re pushing. I’ll spread the word.

        • socalpa

          Did you see the “crap” sent out by the BBC , Guardian, NYT s etc.. ?
          .
          Speaking of “pseudoscience” ?
          .
          Ice free Arctic summers by 2013/14/15/16/17 ? The “Arctic Death Spiral” ? . Arctic summer sea ice extent has increased since 2012 Sept Minima by ~ 40% . Winter since 2005 ,and recent melt 1980-2005 found driven by AMOC ocean cycle ,not CO2.and Arctic ice extent now projected to increase on that basis for decade(s).
          .
          Or the claims also headlined of a 40% decline in marine phytoplankton since 1950 ,the “Death of the Oceans” ? Utterly refuted by in situ observations in all 50-80 year datasets which show marine phytoplankton increases in all basins observed .
          .
          How about the claims Antarctic was melting , increasing sea level rise ? NASA found the opposite in 2015 .
          .
          Or the claims that CO2 elevation was increasing global tropical storm frequency and intensity ? NOAA reports no CO2 impacts currently detectable .
          .
          Just a few samples
          .
          So , what is the specific basis of your pseudoscience claim ? How do they compare with the above examples ?

          • cshorey

            Could you give some references and links? I can’t really work with hyperbole and opinion. Here is an example using the opposite direction:
            Prediction of Arctic warming faster than other parts of the world, Antarctica initially gaining ice, all predicted by Guy Callendar in 1938, all have been observed over the past few decades.
            Smagorinsky and Manabe, 1982 predict a warming Troposphere and cooling Stratosphere with greenhouse warming, and that too has been observed.

      • yoda

        Go to http://www.sg-climate.com might give you some ideas.

  • Li D

    Stupid yanks wouldnt have a clue about what Sir Humphrey was on about.
    Especially deniers, who dont have a clue about anything except bull crap conspiracies they feed each other.
    If the only way ya methodology works is due to conspiracy ya dont have any hope.
    And ya all think your own space agency is lying to ya. Every single yank denier.
    Hahahaha. God its pathetic.
    You are falling very deep into a hole of bias,
    Wojick. Get some collegues to check your work. Some journos, some policy analysts.
    Whats the worst that could happen? Ya get picked up on errors? Thats a good thing isnt it?
    This crap you write isnt remotly journalism or analysis. Its simply agenda, and horribly done agenda too.
    Maybe you in the wrong game.
    How bout being a fireman or florist or carpet cleaner, or dentist or something.
    Cuz you aint cut out to write about climate in an open, transparent, unbiased, lucid, informative manner. Just aint your thing.
    If agenda floats your boat, you need to improve heaps at it.

    • Immortal600

      Having a bad day down under?

      • pkwz

        The climate trolls can be a violent bunch…I guess all progressives are tolerant as long as you agree with them.

        • Immortal600

          How true!

          • cshorey

            The Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumber show continues between Immortal and pkwz. Get off on each other much? Li D was spot on about David. If you go back to the first article of his I commented on, you will find I directly addressed his concerns and told him how temperature is actually measured, and he went silent. He has no real game in this.

            • Immortal600

              We are in your head rent-free, little man.

              • cshorey

                I am in your house and it’s a mess. Cleaning up with David presently, but since you’re here, how does a sealed car in a parking lot heat up more than the air around it?

                • Immortal600

                  Keep asking your lame questions over and over. You haven’t a clue, little man.

                  • cshorey

                    I’ll keep asking this pertinent question to your lame ass as it goes directly to your argument that AGW violates the second law of thermodynamics. P. S. – about 1.5% of the population is taller than I, so there is a good chance I not only look down on you intellectually, but physically as well.

                    • Immortal600

                      Good for you. If you look down on me, why do you even bother to talk about me? Could it be that I reside in that little brain of yours? You’ve already been exposed as not knowing anything about thermodynamics and it must bother you that I see through your smoke and mirrors.

                      BTW, numbnuts, you are still a little man even if you were 6’11”. But of course that blows right over your pea brain.

    • David Wojick

      Can you point to a specific error, LiD?

      Skepticism is not about conspiracies, it is about facts. The green movement is not a conspiracy; it is a political movement, like Communism was.

      • cshorey

        Yeah, I can, and have on almost all your articles. Answer the challenge of temperature anomalies if you’re so damn good at this. The more I see of you, the more I realize how limited your climate knowledge is.

        • David Wojick

          I have already discussed the global temperature record in detail, especially that there is no evidence of greenhouse gas warming. I am pretty sure that you were there.

          I find it interesting that your comments never seem to relate to the articles commented on. Apparently you read them, but have nothing to say about them, so you just say whatever comes into your mind.

          • cshorey

            Oh no you don’t you snake in the grass. You can’t claim you’ve discussed the global temperature record in detail when you never respond to the heart of the matter. You failed to answer on this so I’ll have to copy and post where we left off. Here is my response to you:

            When average surface temperatures are reported they are handled as temperature anomalies from that position through time. Using anomalies instead of absolute temperature gets you away from all the problems you are raising. If what was being reported was absolute average surface temperature, then your argument would hold (but actually may not be right either – see Jones et. al. 1999 that used both absolute values and anomalies). Seeing as you are arguing against absolute apples when the evidence is anomaly orange, you have not proven anything to anyone with knowledge this fact. Are you not concerned that you have to point to a CFACT post you made as “proof” of anything in a peer-reviewed science milieu? You seem a decent enough scientist though you’ve clearly associated yourself with some suspect organizations (e.g. Heartland, CFACT, NRSP, Greening Earth Society) enough that your credibility in climate science can be called into immediate question, but you should be intelligent enough to get the anomaly issue. But with those associations, I feel you will probably dig in your heels. Let’s see.

            second citation for you:

            http://journals.ametsoc.org

            Abstract: “Making use of EOF analysis and statistical optimal averaging techniques, the problem of random sampling error in estimating the global average temperature by a network of surface stations has been investigated. The EOF representation makes it unnecessary to use simplified empirical models of the correlation structure of temperature anomalies. If an adjustable weight is assigned to each station according to the criterion of minimum mean-square error, a formula for this error can be derived that consists of a sum of contributions from successive EOF modes. The EOFs were calculated from both observed data and a noise-forced EBM for the problem of one-year and five-year averages. The mean square statistical sampling error depends on the spatial distribution of the stations, length of the averaging interval, and the choice of the weight for each station data stream. Examples used here include four symmetric configurations of 4 × 4, 6 × 4, 9 × 7, and 20 × 10 stations and the Angell-Korshover configuration. Comparisons with the 100-yr U.K. dataset show that correlations for the time series of the global temperature anomaly average between the full dataset and this study’s sparse configurations are rather high. For example, the 63-station Angell-Korshover network with uniform weighting explains 92.7% of the total variance, whereas the same network with optimal weighting can lead to 97.8% explained total variance of the U.K. dataset.”

            third citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi

            The point here is we don’t know the average body temperature of Immortal600, even if he is brain dead, but if his temperature goes up 1degF each day, he might want to get checked by a doctor. The anomaly is important even if you don’t know the absolute average.

            fourth citation: BEST study again, because even Muller who bought the Climategate absurdity couldn’t find a way to use your logic. Muller in testimony to Congress definitely said he found the same as everyone else, that the removal of bad stations reported by Anthony Watts’ site did not affect the anomaly trends, and more recently said what good climate scientists have known for the past few decades, you can’t explain the present climate (since the 1980’s) without taking greenhouse gas forcing into account.

            And then there are all the fingerprinting studies that let us know it is our greenhouse gasses causing the climate change. Future generations will see that the denial of this science by such bad faith arguments as yours caused more harm than good. You have time to rewrite your epitaph. The science in my original post has weathered every attempt to discredit it on this thread. (the original post was a condensation of the history of published climate science).