Final hours of COP17

The final hours of COP17 are drawing to a close.  Everyone is tired after two weeks of this process, and many negotiators have already left.  The optimistic feelings of yesterday seem to have evaporated. 

South African Foreign Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, President of COP17, is giving an informal stock taking at the moment.  The exhibition area is being dismantled, and apparently in the heart of the conference centre the coffee machines have been taken away.  There is a belief amongst NGOs that the current state of agreements will not keep the average temperature rise to less than 2 degrees.

While the Kyoto protocol (KP) will be extended,  this is likely to be by default.  The deadline for a new agreement has been extended to midnight, and if that doesn’t happen, then the current form of the KP will be extended, but without Canada.  In either 3 or 6 months, a COP ‘extension’ will be held, where another attempt will be made.

To clutch at a straw of positivity, the fortuitous coincidental connections continue.  Half an hour ago I sat down on a couch in a hotel bar, and found myself in the midst of the Friends of the Earth finalising their press release.  Interesting people, and we got chatting after a while.  They were discussing whether to use the Titanic as a metaphor, but ‘collapse’ was chosen as more appropriate.  Oops, so much for that positivity…

If you believe in prayer, please pray hard between now and midnight.

6 responses to “Final hours of COP17

  1. Pray for what, that governments dont pass legislation to enforce carbon taxes and carbon trading? Because certainly doing so will have NO effect on global temperatures and will put the world population under more pressure with more money landing up in the banks and our Earth being more polluted. This is all a UN-sponsored, money-making farce because carbon dioxide is not even a pollutant, almost everything else we emit is. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient and not a significant greenhouse gas. How about actually being effective by doing something FOR the Earth and passing some legislation to stop pollution?

  2. On what basis are you certain? Many people have devoted their lives to studying this, and they tell us that CO2 levels are higher than ever before, and that there is a correlation between CO2 and average temperature. The big energy companies are spending billions of dollars a year on lobbying to try and suppress this, and sponsor senators in the US who try to deny it. But even those scientists do not say they are certain that it is human activity that is causing it. It may be more accurate for you to say “I guess it will have no effect…”, or “I feel it will no effect…”

    I met a NASA scientist at COP17 who spends her day studying satellite images, from which the effects of climate change are undeniable.

    PS: The line ‘CO2 is a nutrient’ is a very oversimplified statement. Salt, for e.g. is both a poison and an essential component of life.

  3. Salt is toxic at a certain concentration, CO2 is not. I am a botanist. CO2 is a plant nutrient at ALL concentrations. And for animals CO2 is only deleterious at above about 50 000ppm where it starts to exclude O2, and not because it is toxic. I am not denying that there is climate change. I am saying our carbon footprint is irrelevant to this, it is our pollution footprint that is affecting our environment. And carbon dioxide is not pollution, almost everything else we emit is. Reducing our carbon footprint will have NO effect on temperatures, let alone other climate changes, they are not correlated, that is an IPCC lie. (see The Great Global Warming Swindle. Read Global Warming: A Convenient Disguise.) COP is rearranging the deckchairs and is a UN sponsored effort to make more money from environmentalist’s consciences. People who believe the whole carbon story are too trusting (gullible) for the planet’s good. The IPCC is a scam planted to spread this propaganda. It is not black or white. There are at least 6 camps here. 1. Big Oil (who say carbon is not a problem in order to sell more oil), 2. Big Business (the Gore camp who want to demonise carbon to sell carbon credits), 3. Polititians (the pro-nuclear camp who say nuclear is clean because it produces less carbon so they can get a hand-out from the nuclear deal), 4. Bought Environmentalists (like Greenpeace who are instigating for Big Business), 5. Trusting Environmentalists (most of the green lobby in the world including the protestors at COP who were playing right into Big Business hands) and 6. Aware Environmentalists (a distressing minority who are not fooled by the entire AGW scam, including CFL lightbulbs, carbon taxes and carbon trading).
    NASA is also a front. I’m sure your paid NASA scientist was also there to spread disinformation. To repeat, I am not denying climate change, I deny that our carbon footprint has any effect on the Earth’s temperatures, or other climate variables. The Earth’s problem is pollution, not carbon.

  4. The movie The Great Global Warming Swindle has been thoroughly discredited. (Note that it does actually deny climate change.) For a short but very clear analysis of that movie, see

    I think there are some points in what you are saying. But I struggle to believe that so many of the people I know are lying to me about carbon dioxide because they are being paid to do so.

  5. There is a huge incentive to discredit the GGWS movie. But even Gore’s lecturer, from whom he got the idea of the correlation between CO2 and temp, recanted on his idea just before he died under suspicious circumstances.
    I know, it is very difficult to believe that there are so many paid propagandists. (just see what happens to their budget if they find that CO2 and temp are not related). Did you not hear about “climategate”? People are lying to us for personal benefit.
    We are being duped all the time. Research flouride (it is not to help our teeth) chemtrails (not to ammeliorate AGW) iodine in salt (not to alleviate IDD) nuclear energy (not for the people’s benefit) aspartame (not a sugar substitute to help us keep thin), GM foods (not to alleviate hunger) etc etc etc. We are being lied to on many fronts to keep us dulled down and paying. And it is trusting people like you who keep the lies alive. 🙂 I love you for it, but it is frustrating knowing that the longer we buy into the bullshit the longer it will take to work our way out from under the burden of the consequences.

  6. Here is a short article by a meteorologist who thinks that CO2 concentration is actually regulated by temperature (the opposite to the IPCC findings).
    He says climate change is not anthropogenic, but I disagree. Certainly the sun is the major driver of the weather, but HAARP can effect the melting of glaciers, the creating of earthquakes and the redirecting of hurricanes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s