What was surprising was that the topic of the leaked emails and documents that has prompted ‘Climategate’ didn’t come up in the questions and answers section.
Read More
To make themselves feel important most delegates at international negotiating conferences always talk in acronyms, but at Copenhagen they’re in overdrive.
Like the debate about climate change in Australia, symbolism over substance is triumphing in Copenhagen and the pledge to make the conference carbon neutral is looking decidedly hard to deliver.
The Australian government alone has more than one hundred registered delegates.
The credibility of this segment of so-called news was zero to any intelligent person; even, I would hope, to those wedded to the conventional wisdom of man-made global warming.
Is any one actually in favour of pollution? Are people really organized and paid to encourage more pollution? Does this make any sense at all?
The best entertainment was at a side-event with a speaker who dared decry the NGO group think that prevails over the conference.
Anyone sceptical of the UN system or the science of climate change never made it into the opening ceremony under the gaze of the world’s media. Instead their voices were sent to the other end of the conference centre out of sight, and out of mind.
Suppose a conventional wisdom is substantially astray from the truth (the way the world really is) and its impact is adverse. Never mind how it started, the important question is when and under what circumstances will it go away.
A milestone in this mess can be said to be when John Houghton of the IPCC said it was the IPCC’s job to “orchestrate” the views of science. Everything that has happened flows as an inevitable consequence of that.
To avoid frequent logins, please check the box.
Lost your password?