Thursday, December 10, 2009

"On the fourth day of Copenhagen,
the GreenFrauds gave to me . . . "

What about Day Four? Our friends from PJTV are back with another video; the transcript is below.

Dateline Copenhagen: Excess and Waste Define Copenhagen, with interviewer Bill Whittle and interviewee Bruce Bawer, author of While Europe Slept.

Whittle: What are your overall impressions of the gathering in Copenhagen? What have you seen so far in terms of the general vibe?

Bawer: The more you look at what's going on here, the more you realize that this has absolutely nothing to do with climate or science, at least not hard science. It has a lot to do with social science. It's a gathering of social scientists, activists, environmental groups. It's a movement, and to describe it as anything that has to do with science is misguided. They've seized on the data provided by a small number of scientists to form the foundation for what is basically a political movement, and these few climatologists have become heroes to these people.

I was just looking at this thing that they're handing out today for this side event, there's always side events, this book Klimaforum, The People's Climate Summit, and among the events they are holding, sessions entitled "Tackling Capitalism in Climate Crisis," "Women's Perspective on Nuclear Energy," "Feminists Struggling Against Climate Change," and "Privatization of the Environment." "Global Warming, the Capitalist Catastrophe and the EcoSocialist Alternative." And finally, "Cuba's Energy Revolution," which is apparently about the fact that Cuba is a model of sustainable development.

Whittle: Because there's nothing there. I was just in Cuba. There's nothing there to sustain.

Bawer: And here, speaking of Cuba, here in the official newspaper, the official daily newspaper of this conference, the COP 15 Post, they have an article entitled, "Cuba: A World Climate Leader." You have to hear this to believe it. "The Cuban people are a tremendous inspiration. They are living proof that another, better world is possible. Usually, when Cuba is cited as an example to follow, it is because of the health and educational systems, which are among the best in the world. Or it is because of decades of solidarity work in developing countries. But who would have thought that the Cubans would become the avant-garde of sustainability and ecology?" That's what we're about here, that's what's going on here.

Whittle: You can be the avant-garde of sustainability if you don't have an economy--that's the way you want to lead the world in emissions, don't have an economy.

Bawer: Don't have an economy, don't have personal freedoms. . . .

Whittle: And that's where we're headed, no doubt. Bruce, we should note, that you were actually denied a press pass to the U.N. conference. Have other journalists fared that same fate, and is there any kind of selection bias that you're getting in terms of who gets a pass and who doesn't.

Bawer: As some of the people watching this may know, the journalist for the website WorldNetDaily was denied accreditation, and it was very clear that it was because of the perceived politics of that website. The U.N. did not want somebody there from WorldNetDaily; the U.N. very obviously doesn't want somebody there from PajamasMedia. I was talking to somebody yesterday at the alternate conference, the actual scientists' conference that I mentioned yesterday, and she told me of a friend of hers who is a leading journalist with many many years of very distinguished experience in in the mainstream media, who also is shocked, that for the first time in his life, he was denied accreditation. He's never been denied accreditation to anything. I'm trying to get a hold of this person and maybe report further on that.

Whittle: When science drops the internal criticism and the internal examination of debate that makes science work, then it's not science anymore, and they don't get to hold it up as the shield of science.

Bawer: This is about spreading information, and this is supposed to be the United Nations. This is not the way you do business with journalists. This is not the way you treat the media. This is not some little private organization that has the right to say, "We don't want you here." This is the United Nations, and legitimate journalists should as a matter of course be allowed to cover the event, and it should be an additional scandal, on top of Climategate, that they're doing this. It all fits together, though, doesn't it.

Whittle: It sure does. They have to control the message, because if they don't then nasty little details get out. Bruce, one of the things we're hearing about the Copenhagen summit are these reports of waste and excess, like we're hearing 1400 private limousines and any number of private jets flying in and out to tell us how bad carbon is. Have you seen any of this yourself?

Bawer: Well, one thing I should mention is that a friend of mine, Jonathan Foreman, wrote a terrific piece in the London Times the other day in which he went into some detail about this, and one of the facts that he noted is there are 41,000 tons of carbon dioxide that are going to be spent on people coming here and leaving here and doing their stuff here, and as he noted that's roughly the same amount as the total carbon emissions of the Kingdom of Morocco in 2006.

I was at one of these side venues which I was allowed to enter today, and just the amount of printed matter, stacked up all over the place, it's endless, you could spend the rest of your life reading it, it's all the same sort of stuff. They must have had to cut down part of the Amazonian rain forest the size of Rhode Island to print all this stuff. They're all such good environmentalists. Speaking of which, I don't own a car, so I'm going to send this back to you, it's a bumper sticker: "International Financial Institutions, Out of Climate Now." I don't even know what it means.

Whittle: Bruce, you can't make this stuff up. You just can't. Thanks for checking in with us today and we'll be looking to get your report from you tomorrow. Be sure to visit -end video-

I just spent a couple of minutes browsing the website of the COP15 Post, the newspaper mentioned in the video, the one with the article extolling Cuba as a green model for the world. I have one word for these ClimateFraud folks (well, two words): They are fucking nuts. I had to stop reading when I came to an article that spells out what one of the future "green jobs" will undoubtedly be: waste picking. I am not making this up. If we continue on the road these fruitcakes at Copenhagen would take us down, then people like you and me in the U.S. may have grandchildren who make their living as waste pickers. Rag picker is an occupation that can be found in England's 19th century census. It does seem in a lot of ways that the ClimateFrauds would like to take us backwards in time, and 19th century England would be a start.

There's another article in the COP15Post rag about "burying the American dream," where in a mock funeral ceremony a toy car was buried in the ground: “The American Dream does not understand the limitations of our planet. In order to move ahead we must realise this, and pursue a different kind of lifestyle,” said event organiser, and long-term resident of Christiania, Britta Lilles√łe. No doubt about it, these green Euros loathe the West.

Here's an article from WorldNetDaily by Joseph Farah: "Call it Carbonhagen." No wonder the conference didn't give journalist credentials to WND. Here's an excerpt: [The conference] is not about results. It's not even about a real crisis. It's about feeling good about making demands on others and imposing draconian rules that are in and of themselves the real goal. It's about creating a scenario in which people like Al Gore and Barack Obama can be honored for their courage and foresight without sacrificing anything themselves. There's a name for that. It's hypocrisy with a capital H.

Alan Carlin, a Senior Operations Research Analyst for the EPA, a man who has worked for the government for 40 years, is an interesting voice in the debate about Climate, from another video from the people at [Oh, have you noticed--now it's not Climate Crisis, Climate Change, Global Warming, Global Climate Change--it's none of those now. The GreenFrauds are simply calling the issue Climate. So I guess that's what we'll do here.] He's an EPA "inconvenient voice," a whistle-blower whose report to the EPA warned that the science behind climate change is questionable, at best. That report has been suppressed by his bosses at the EPA.

The interviewer asked Carlin who at the EPA was suppressing his report and why. Calin's answer: My guess, and it's purely a guess, is that the administration came into office with clearly defined views as to what the science is and exactly what they wannted to do. The Bush administration was much more open to new analysis and to other ideas as to what, if anything, should be done. If you already know when you come into office what you want to do, my guess is that it becomes much harder to try to reconcile opposing points of view than if you are more open in your viewpoints.

P.S. Carlin has a BS in physics from Cal Tech, and a PhD in economics from MIT. He also has a website where the suppressed report and his other reports can be found: Carlin Economics and Science. His most recent post there is this--"The Politicization of EPA: The Administration's Radical Endangerment Gamble."

The Heritage Foundation blog, The Foundary, has another good post plus video: "Copenhagen's Implications for American Sovereignty." Steven Groves from Heritage says that he'll be there in Copenhagen when they're supposed to be hammering out the final deal. Groves says that American sovereignty is at stake is because the treaty that's being contemplated in Copenhagen will create a brand-new international bureaucracy, one that is not going to be transparent or accountable. That bureaucracy is going to be in charge of implementing these very new stringent climate obligations on the United States. And most importantly, they will be the organ who will make the final determinations about whether the United States is in compliance with its treaty obligations.

See the whole video below and read Groves' article here.

No comments: