CFACT.TV

CFACT press conference to feature U.S. Senator Inhofe

Josh — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 07:23:36 +0000

C F A C T

The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 6 December, 2011

Media Advisory

CFACT press conference to feature U.S. Senator Inhofe

Wednesday, 7 December, 15:30 Room Kosi Palm (ICC Level 2)

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec. 6, 2011 — On Wednesday, 7 December at 15:30 CFACT will cosponsor a press conference with U.S. Senator James Inhofe in Room Kosi Palm (ICC level 2).

On Tuesday, CFACT conducted a highly publicized parachute drop which called attention to Climategate 2.0 (details including usable video of the drop and Lord Monckton jumping from the plane at www.CFACT.tv).

The Wednesday press conference will feature an analysis from Senator Inhofe of the prospects of a new climate treaty in the U.S. Senate. The conference will also feature the release of Marc Morano’s (editor in chief of ClimateDepot.com) new report “From A-Z” which details troubles and failings in what has been falsely proclaimed by global warming advocates to be a “settled scientific consensus.”

“Climate Depot’s new A-Z report reveals that the great man-made global warming catastrophe that was predicted – has been cancelled.” Morano said. “The scientific reality is that on virtually every claim — from A-Z — the claims of the promoters of man-made climate fears are failing and in many instances going in the opposite direction. The global warming movement is suffering the scientific death of a thousand cuts. This Climate Depot special report categorizes and indexes the full range of climate developments in a handy A-Z reference guide from the Antarctic to Polar Bears to Mount Kilimanjaro to Sea Levels to Global temperatures to hurricanes and tornados.”

Nobel Prize nominee, Leon Louw, Executive Director of South Africa’s Free Market Institute, will discuss the devastating impact climate policy has had on the economies of both the developed and developing world and the crippling hindrance it poses to the poor.

South African nuclear physicist Dr. Kelvin Kemm will discuss global warming policy providing a unique South African analysis.

Lord Christopher Monckton, freshly rested from his parachute jump to call attention to Climategate 2.0, will explain exactly why it would be a mistake to adopt a new treaty in Durban along the lines of the failed Kyoto Protocol.

“Secretary Figueres is telling the COP that she can obtain a new commitment period in Durban.” Said CFACT Executive Director Craig Rucker. “After she hears what Senator Inhofe has to say, she may want to reevaluate her wishful thinking.”

Go to www.CLIMATEDEPOT.com for details on Climategate 2.0. More information on CFACT’s mission to Durban at www.CFACT.tv. Also at www.CFACT.org, & www.CFACT.eu.

- # # # -

CFACT parachutes into Durban Climate Conference

Josh — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 01:49:36 +0000

Earlier today, CFACT’s skydiving team parachuted past COP17 onto Amanzimtoti beach. The divers trailed smoke and banners proclaiming “Climategate 2.0, Science Not Settled” and “No New Treaty.” Multiple media outlets showed up to record the event, including the AP, BBC, and South Africa’s national news network. It was a huge success! Climategate 2.0 can not be ignored!

The second batch of emails from scientists working on the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change contain shocking revelations which show an insular cadre of climate scientists coordinating efforts to place advocacy ahead of science, stifle dissent, and conceal information which detracts from a preconceived, ideologically driven, global warming narrative.

“Media covering COP17 are kidding themselves if they think they can ignore and wish away Climategate 2.0,” said CFACT Executive Director Craig Rucker. “Lord Monckton, the folks from Climate Depot and I will carry our message by parachute if that’s what it takes to wake up this conference and place the Climategate evidence of corrupted science where the world must see it.”

CFACT skydivers trailing banners over Durban, South Africa

The Climategate emails provide a shockingly candid look at the machinations of the high priests of global warming. They have given rise to renewed demands that the IPCC, EU and the EPA cancel existing plans and programs to cap and tax carbon emissions. These misguided policies already have created economic havoc in Europe, cost hundreds of thousands of jobs in the U.S. and pose a major threat to the world economy.

Marc Morano, publisher of CFACT’s ClimateDepot.com, said that the emails reveal the scientists at the heart of the manmade global warming industry have been “caught red-handed exaggerating the extent of manmade global warming while privately admitting to one another that the evidence is nowhere near as strong as they were claiming.”

The new emails led Morano to conclude that they “… further expose the upper echelon of the UN IPCC as being more interested in crafting a careful narrative than following the evidence.” He notes, for example, that Penn State professor Michael Mann stated in one email that, “The important thing is to make sure they’re [climate skeptics] losing the PR battle.” The University of East Anglia’s Keith Briffa (a colleague of the already discredited EAU Climate Research Center head Phil Jones) also chimed in, “I find myself in the strange position of being very skeptical of the quality of all present reconstructions, yet sounding like a pro greenhouse zealot here!”

Rucker further noted that “The release of these emails is yet another major setback for alarmists who are hyping fears over climate change in order to exercise influence over ever-increasing segments of the U.S. and world economy.”

CFACT skydiver trailing banner reading "Climategate 2.0, Science Not Settled"

CFACT, which has been a fully accredited non-governmental organization at these UN events for two decades, will be closely monitoring and offering daily reports on the developments in Durban. Rucker says the new emails provide even stronger reasons to oppose such radical Green initiatives as the World Wildlife Fund-Oxfam proposal for a new $25 per ton global tax on shipping with the goal of curtailing carbon emissions; the call by Bolivia, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Venezuela for a new climate tax on worldwide financial transactions; and a proposed new “sustainability treaty.”

As Rucker notes, “The real agenda of the climate alarmists is to promote massively expanded government regulation worldwide, at the expense of jobs creation and economic growth. The policies they advocate will do the greatest harm to the world’s poorest people and ensure that citizens of developing nations have no chance at true freedom and prosperity.”

Gandhi told us, “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” CFACT’s parachute drop will force the media to cease ignoring the evidence. CFACT looks forward to winning.

Go to www.CLIMATEDEPOT.com for details on Climategate 2.0. More information on CFACT’s mission to Durban at www.CFACT.tv. Also at www.CFACT.org, & www.CFACT.eu.

Climategate 2.0 parachutes into COP17

Josh — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 12:57:44 +0000

C F A C T

The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 5, 2011

Climategate 2.0 parachutes into COP17

CFACT skydivers to tow banners into UN Durban conference
Lord Monckton, Craig Rucker, Climate Depot to parachute
Emails exposing biased science cannot be ignored

On Tuesday, December 6 at 11:00 AM, CFACT skydivers will parachute past COP17 trailing banners demanding attention to the Climategate 2.0 emails. The skydiving team will land at Toti beach. Media and all interested persons are invited to the beach to observe the landing.

Marc Morano, publisher of CFACT’s ClimateDepot.com, said that the emails reveal the scientists at the heart of the manmade global warming industry have been “caught red-handed exaggerating the extent of man-made global warming while privately admitting to one another that the evidence is nowhere near as strong as they were claiming.”

Go to www.CLIMATEDEPOT.com for details on Climategate 2.0. More information on CFACT’s mission to Durban at www.CFACT.tv. Also at www.CFACT.org, & www.CFACT.eu.

- # # # -

Can COP17 technocrats rescue the warming scam?

Josh — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 00:08:08 +0000

The mood at this year’s UN climate conference is subdued. Perhaps fearful. In CFACT’s talks with the representatives of government, business, even the more radical NGOs, we’ve yet to find anyone confident that a successor treaty to the Kyoto Protocol will emerge in Durban.

The usual sideshow has been assembled. You can find rows of displays making their standard pleas for your tax dollars. Wind farms, solar, mass redistribution in the name of “climate justice,” and all the usual scare tactics have assembled.

Oxfam actually sat at a conference table they had carried into the waves of the Indian Ocean. But the sea level had not risen – not in any meaningful way. They carried their table to the same place on the beach where the waves would have found them years ago, or had humankind never engaged in commerce, industry, or had the temerity to harness fire in the first place.

Carbon profiteers and the global warming left sense that the annual climate party isn’t quite the same shindig it once was. They are pulling out their usual tricks, but the public has seen through them.

For the massive global warming industry, all hope vests now in the technocrats. Behind closed doors, out of site of the huge plenary session and the NGO freak show, a very small cadre of bureaucrats are meeting. They dream of treaties, but these skilled inside operators won’t let that stop them. They are putting together side agreements which permit them a way to work around such inconvenient obstacles as the U.S. Senate and whichever protections have been created to protect the sovereignty of other nations. Do not underestimate, the potency and cost of these side agreements.

Global warming is about money. Billions. They want to make it trillions. Those cashing in on this fortune will not go gentle into that dark night. The Green Climate Fund alone is now set at $100 billion and they are pushing in Durban to make it $400 billion. $400 billion may sound like a lot of money, but it is only a very small slice of the global warming pie. Consider the subsidies, set asides, guarantees, handouts, grants, shakedowns, etc. The money is vast and the special interests protecting it are legion.

The global warming cause may not be what it was, but make no mistake – the danger in Durban is real. The climatecrats will leave Africa with their money intact and with fresh plans to renew their assault upon the economy of the free world next year.

It. Isn’t. Happening.

Josh — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 22:12:03 +0000

By Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Mainstream science, politics, bureaucracy, academe, banking, business, media – all were of one mind. The West, so the playbook ran, must be shut down at once to Save The Planet from “global warming”, er, “climate change”, um, “climate disruption”, no, “extreme-weather events”, ah, that is, “energy-security challenges”. Shale gas? That would solve everything. Hundreds of years’ global supply. No more peak oil. Low carbon footprint. Ban it quick.

I find myself with CFACT in Durban among the creatures of “consensus” for the annual UN climate gabfest. Yet the party line was wrong. At a recent dinner for the inconvenient economist Bjorn Lomborg in London, I first uttered the three fateful words that now fill the hearts of the world’s governing climate racketeers with dread.

“It. Isn’t. Happening.”

When I plopped these three plump pebbles into the conversation, there was a ripple of aghast silence. It was as though I’d perpetrated what the Professor of Greek at Cambridge used to call a “gaseous halation” in front of the Queen.

Most of the diners were climate skeptics. But they were making a bundle out of it. The skeptics had almost as much of a direct, cash vested interest in flogging the long-dead horse of climatic apocalypse as the prophets and profiteers of climate doom.

It just wasn’t the done thing to poop on the party by pointing out that every dire prediction that the usual suspects had made with such sneering arrogance has failed.

Just look. Professor “Phil” Jones of the “University” of East Anglia had to admit, when the BBC’s chief environmental campaigner – er, “correspondent” – put to him a question I’d drafted – that there had been no statistically-significant “global warming” for 15 years. Oops! The UN’s models had not predicted that.

Arctic sea ice was supposed to be gone by 2013. Then it rebounded. Then it was going to reach a new low on 15 September this year, when Al Gore launched his Titanic “Climate Unreality” project. The ice did not oblige. Gore hit a berg that somehow hadn’t melted. His project sank. Even his fellow fortune-hunters in the Green[back] movement now disown his bleating attribution of every recent natural disaster to “global warming”.

Antarctic sea ice has been on the up throughout the satellite era. Global sea ice shows little trend in 30 years.

Polar bears were supposed to be headed for extinction. The fossils on the Supreme Court said so (but they’ve been extinct for years). Today there are five times as many polar bears as 70 years ago.

Kilimanjaro has been losing ice since 1880. Most of the summit glacier had gone by 1936, when Hemingway wrote The Snows. “Global warming” could not have caused the recent ice loss: NASA says the region has been cooling for 30 years. The summit temperature, monitored by satellites, has not changed. Now the glacier is growing again.

Sea level is the big one. James Hansen of NASA, who made more than $1 million out of the climate scare last year alone, had predicted it would rise imminently by 246 feet. Was he right? No. The increase over the past eight years, according to the Envisat satellite, was at a rate equivalent to 2 inches per century. Not meters, not even feet. Inches. Two of them. Per century. Gee wow golly gosh! Take to the boats!

Malaria was going to spread because of “global warming”. Yet the terrible leap in mortality from 50,000 to 1 million child deaths a year occurred a generation ago, when the Environmental Defense Fund – which, with Greenpeace and the World Wide Fund, spent $1 billion of taxpayers’ and donors’ cash on anti-Western pseudo-enviro propaganda last year alone – successfully campaigned for a worldwide ban on DDT, the only effective agent against the mosquitoes that carry malaria.

When the Board of the EDF met to plan the DDT ban, its then legal advisor, Victor John Yannacone Jr., begged it to ban only outdoor use: DDT sprayed inside houses would harm only the mosquitoes and spare the children.

The then chairman, furious, fired Yannacone on the spot. As he left the room, someone said: “That’s the last time we employ anyone who knows any science.” That ban has killed 40 million children.

Extreme-weather deaths are down sharply. Global tropical-cyclone and hurricane activity is almost at its least in 30 years. Severe tornadoes have declined. Patterns of drought and flood remain as unpredictable and as devastating as ever. Bangladesh and nearly all of the Pacific atolls are gaining land mass, not losing it.

Net primary productivity of trees and plants worldwide is up. If you want a greener planet, add as much CO2 to the air as you can. Your emissions are also helping to stave off the next Ice Age. It’s already 6000 years overdue.

Yet the dreary, wasteful, pointless congresses of the greedy feeble-minded continue. The Bali Road-Map to Nowhere. The Copenhagen World-Government Treaty that collapsed as soon as it saw the light of day. The Cancun Concordats to establish 1000 – yes, 1000 – new bureaucracies: the structure of the unelected world government that every ex-politician from Gore and Chirac to Attali is demanding.

Everyone says nothing will happen at Durban. That worries me. It suggests the process of building a totalitarian global junta by what one UN official at Cancun called “transparent impenetrability” – publishing documents of such prolix length and complex obscurantism that no one can understand a word and yet no one can later deny the information was available – will invisibly gather pace.

Lord Reith, the BBC’s first chairman, laying the foundation-stone of what is now the abomination of desolation called Harlow New Town, was heard to mutter, “You’re not going to like it, but you’re going to have it!”

So it will be with the Marxists’ wet dream that is global totalitarian dictatorship. You’re not going to like it. But the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow and I are in Durban to stop them. So perhaps you’re not going to have it after all.

Durban due diligence

Josh — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 21:43:08 +0000

By Kelvin Kemm

From my vantage point here in South Africa, I could hardly miss the major build-up to the COP-17 United Nations world environment and climate conference, which is being held November 28 to December 9 in Durban, where I went to school and university.

For weeks international news broadcasts spoke of “the road to Durban,” and people of all ranks made daily comments concerning issues to be addressed at COP-17. Conference organisers announced that bottled water would be limited, or even prohibited, because making, shipping and disposing of plastic bottles was not environmentally sound – and in any event Durban tap water is so good that anyone can safely drink water out of any tap, whether in a hotel room, restaurant or back yard garden hose. I agree with both points; Durban municipal water is excellent everywhere.

Other images also drifted through my mind, such as those of legendary scientist and philosopher Galileo, who dared to announce that it was not the sun that orbited the earth, but the planets, including the earth, which orbited the sun. The ruling establishment of the day jumped on Galileo, threatening him with dire consequences if he did not toe the politically correct line and recant his claims. He did so to avoid burning at the stake but was placed under house arrest anyway, to ensure that he did not spread his views, and his book was banned.

Many years later, during the French Revolution, baying mobs in Paris streets were ready to chop the heads off anyone perceived not to be part of the New World Order. Even scientist Antoine Lavoisier, the discoverer of oxygen and hydrogen, was one of many unfortunate people who lost their heads to French guillotines.

Today, I fear we are experiencing similar, though less lethal, sentiments on topics of so-called global warming, global climate change, global climate disruption and weather “weirding.” In far too many instances, any person who dares to challenge official dogma is branded a “denier” and treated as an enemy of society. This is not merely sad; it is dangerous to all mankind.

Chanting climate change advocacy groups want non-compliant businesses and industries found guilty of crimes against the planet, so that condemned industrialists can be hunted down and punished. This is destructive of reasoned scientific debate, affordable energy and modern civilization.

The asserted evidence that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is totally to blame for any observed climate changes is at best scientifically very shaky. There are far too many holes in the theory for it to pass the conventional rigour that should be applied to any scientific debate.

The evidence shows serious deviations between CO₂ claims, computer models and computer-generated forecasts and scenarios, on the one hand – and actual observations and measurements of temperature and weather, on the other hand. Historical and archaeological evidence (of major climate and weather changes and extremes) likewise do not support claims that allegedly stable climate conditions have suddenly been thrown into disarray by human greenhouse gas emissions.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and observed temperature changes over the past century simply do not correlate nearly as well as necessary for proper scientific analysis. Similarly, historical evidence clearly demonstrates that there was a Medieval Warm Period (MWP) of great health, wealth and prosperity, during which temperatures were warmer than today’s, but with no anthropogenic carbon dioxide in the equation.

Archaeology and history also show that successful Viking settlements died out in Greenland after the MWP, as a significant 500-year-long period of global cooling set in. The coldest point of this Little Ice Age was the well-documented Maunder Minimum, when ice fairs were held on London’s frozen Thames River. Contemporary paintings of these frozen festivals still exist today.

Similar long-term periods, such as the Roman Warming, have likewise been documented, as have lengthy periods of droughts and floods in various ancient societies – to say nothing of major ice ages and interglacial periods that affected much of Europe and North and South America. Previous significant climatic changes are hardly rare events. However, for obvious reasons, the global warming advocacy faction does not want to discuss these historical periods.

Moreover, over the past decade, significant new scientific evidence has suggested that observed global warming can probably be explained largely or entirely by changes in solar activity and thus cosmic ray incidence on earth, consequent changes in cloud cover and atmospheric water vapour levels, periodic shifts in oceanic temperatures and currents, and other natural phenomena.

Why, then, do we witness repeated attempts to demonize and bury any hint that solar activity is a principal cause of observed global warming? Why do climate change alarmists seek to suppress evidence that the Earth has not warmed and may even have cooled slightly since 1998? Why do so many Climategate 1.0 and 2.0 emails reflect much more private uncertainty among alarmist climate scientists than they have been willing to admit publicly?

These actions are much too close to the Galileo and French Revolution affairs for comfort.

Even worse, misguided government and corporate policies and actions worldwide – in response to the false science and high pressure tactics – will be highly detrimental to mankind, especially poor families that will be trapped in perpetual poverty, disease, malnutrition and premature death.

We can only hope that future generations will not group the Galileo, French Revolution and climate change eras as similar Dark Ages, when “establishment” zealots and easily inflamed crowds suppressed science and analytical truth.

Let us hope, instead, that at least some world leaders will have the courage to stand up at COP-17 and demand the kind of scientific rigour that brought so much enlightenment and progress over the centuries. Proper due diligence in Durban requires nothing less.

Only then will poverty be eradicated, and health and environmental conditions improve, for billions of people all over our planet.

Dr. Kelvin Kemm is a CFACT scientific advisor. He holds a PhD in nuclear physics, is currently CEO of Stratek and lives in Pretoria, South Africa.

Climategate 2.0 exposes climate science hypocrisy on eve of UN’s Durban Conference

Josh — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:32:35 +0000

C F A C T

The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 23, 2011

Climategate 2.0 exposes climate science hypocrisy on eve of UN’s Durban Conference

A second batch of leaked emails from scientists working on board and alongside the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have come to light. They contain shocking revelations which show an insular cadre of climate scientists coordinating efforts to place advocacy ahead of science, stifle dissent, and conceal information which detracts from a preconceived, ideologically driven, global warming narrative.

This shockingly candid look at the machinations of the high priests of global warming has given rise to renewed demands that the EPA, EU and global community cancel existing plans and programs designed to radically lower or cap and tax carbon emissions. These misguided policies already have created economic havoc in Europe, cost hundreds of thousands of jobs in the U.S. and pose a major threat to the world economy.

Marc Morano, publisher of CFACT’s ClimateDepot.com, said that the emails, known collectively as Climategate 2.0, “arrived to drain what little life there was left in the man-made global warming movement.”

The revelations come just as thousands are preparing to descend on Durban, South Africa, for the IPCC’s COP 17 Climate Change conference that begins on November 28th. CFACT Executive Director Craig Rucker noted that “The release of these emails is yet another major setback for alarmists who are hyping fears over climate change in order to exercise influence over ever-increasing segments of the U.S. and world economy.”

As Rucker notes, “The real agenda of the climate radicals is to promote massively expanded government regulation worldwide, at the expense of jobs creation and economic growth. The policies they advocate will do the greatest harm to the world’s poorest people and ensure that citizens of developing nations have no chance at true freedom and prosperity.”

Go to www.CLIMATEDEPOT.com for details on Climategate 2.0. More information on CFACT’s mission to Durban at www.CFACT.tv. Also at www.CFACT.org, & www.CFACT.eu.

- # # # -

Speaking sense to power at the UN climate conference in Durban is reminiscent of Galileo

Josh — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:30:22 +0000

By Kelvin Kemm

PRETORIA – From my vantage point here in South Africa, I am aware of the momentum of the major build-up to the next big United Nations world environment conference, COP 17, which will be held in December, in Durban, the city where I went to school and university. I am honored to be part of CFACT’s delegation to the Durban conference. We’ve certainly got our work cut out for us.

We hear of ‘the road to Durban’ on international news broadcasts and, daily, people of all ranks are making comments on the issues to be addressed at COP 17. The conference organizers have already announced that the availability of bottled water will be limited, or, perhaps, prohibited because Durban tap water is so good that anyone can drink water out of any tap – be it in a hotel room, restaurant or back garden. Curtailing bottled water will limit the environmental impact of all the plastic bottles, water transport, refuse transport, and so on. I agree with that – Durban municipal water is excellent everywhere.

I find other images also drifting through my mind, such as those of legendary scientist and philosopher Galileo, who dared to announce that he was of the opinion that it was not the sun that orbited the earth but that it was actually the other way around. He stated that it was the planets, including the earth, which orbited the sun. The establishment of the day jumped on Galileo and he was threatened with dire consequences if he did not toe the establishment line and recant his claims. He was forced to recant to stay alive, but he was placed under house arrest anyway to make sure that he did not spread his views, and his book was banned.

Many years later, when the French Revolution took place, there were baying mobs in the streets of Paris ready to chop off the head of anyone who was perceived not to be part of the new order. French scientist Antoine Lavoisier, the discoverer of both oxygen and hydrogen, was one of the unfortunate people to lose his head to the French guillotine.

In modern times, I fear that we are experiencing similar sentiments to those of the Galileo period and the French Revolution period, when the topics of climate change and global warming are discussed. In far too many instances, any person who dares to challenge the climate status quo is branded a denier and is treated as an enemy of society. This is not only sad, but is also dangerous to all of mankind.

A chanting climate change advocacy group that wants modern business and industry to be guilty so that the branded anti- social industrialists can be hunted down and punished is destructive to reasoned scientific debate about climate change issues.

The scientific evidence that anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) is solely to blame for any observed climate change is scientifically very shaky. There are far too many holes in the theory for it to pass the conventional rigour that should be applied to scientific debate.

The scientific evidence shows serious deviations from the CO2 claims, as does the historical and archaeological evidence, to just brush it aside.

The CO2 concentrations and observed temperature changes over the past century just do not correlate anywhere near as much as is necessary for scientific rigour.

Historical evidence clearly tells us that there was a Medieval Warm Period (MWP) of great health, wealth and prosperity during which temperatures were warmer than currently, but with no anthropogenic CO2 in the equation.

Archaeology and history show us that successful Viking settlements died out in Greenland after the MWP, as a global cooling period, set in, the coldest point of which is well documented as the Maunder Minimum. Ice fairs were held on the frozen River Thames in London. Contemporary paintings of these frozen festivals still exist today.

The global warming advocacy faction does not want to discuss these previous global warm and cold periods. In fact, there are more such periods in the records, such as the Roman Warming, so previous significant climatic changes are not rare events.

In the past decade, significant scientific evidence came to light to indicate that observed global warming can probably be entirely explained by cosmic ray incidence on earth, linked to the magnetic shielding of our earth, which, in turn, links to solar activity, as measured by sun spot activity.

This theory fits the facts very well, so why do we witness a paranoia to demonise and bury any hint of solar activity being the cause of observed global warming? Why is the fact that 1998 has been the warmest year in modern times, and since then gradual global cooling has been occurring, being so efficiently suppressed by many?

Such action is far too close to the Galileo affair and the response of the crowds during the French Revolution.

False and misguided government and corporate policy and actions worldwide will be highly detrimental to mankind in the coming decades, if it is based on misguided and inaccurate climate science conclusions.

In the future, mankind must not look back at history and group the Galileo era, the French Revolution era and climate change era as being similar for the rapid crowd suppression of the analytical truth.

Let us hope that some world leaders at COP 17 have the courage to stand up and demand scientific rigour of the type that has been developed over centuries.

Science and sensible analysis must triumph over reactionary crowd theory worship in the international climate science debate.

Dr. Kelvin Kemm is a CFACT scientific advisor. He holds a PhD in nuclear physics, is currently CEO of Stratek and lives in Pretoria, South Africa.

CFACT to debunk climate propaganda and provide balanced perspective at COP17

Josh — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:19:00 +0000

C F A C T

The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

A D V I S O R Y

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 16, 2011

CONTACT: Audrey Mullen, +1 (703) 548-1160

CFACT to debunk climate propaganda and provide

balanced perspective at UN’s COP17 in Durban, South Africa

Lord Monckton, Marc Morano, Dr. Kelvin Kemm, Dr. Leon Louw, Craig Rucker

Available for all media

Ready to rise above personal attacks, innuendo and unbalanced repetition of extreme global warming pronouncements?

Journalists seeking to improve upon the annual one-sided climate conference propaganda fest, kindly take notice:

CFACT, the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (an international NGO and veteran of numerous UN conferences) is your go-to source to include balanced, open-minded perspective in your reporting.

CFACT will lead a learned, witty, well-informed, but unabashedly skeptical delegation to COP17, the UN Conference on Climate Change, November 28 to December 9 in Durban, South Africa. CFACT’s delegation will be available for interviews and media appearances before, during and after COP17.

“Every December campaigners, bureaucrats and those seeking to cash in on climate, fly to a resort where the media parrots every dire or vitriolic pronouncement no matter how baseless or extreme,” said CFACT’s Craig Rucker who will lead the delegation. “Polls show the public is tired of the hype and wants more. CFACT is ready to clear the air once and for all. Will the media rise to the occasion?”

Marc Morano, who publishes CFACT’s “Climate Depot” will feature his report “From A-Z” which details a full gamut of failures in the argument for global warming.

Lord Monckton and Marc Morano both make extremely articulate, informed and interesting guests on television and radio and offer valuable balance for print and online journalism. Kelvin Kemm and Leon Louw will offer unique South African perspectives. Craig Rucker co-founded CFACT well over two decades ago and offers a wealth of public policy experience.

Global warming science and policy is anything but settled. CFACT looks forward to engaging in a balanced, civil, informed and genuine dialogue in Durban.

More details as well as contact information in Durban will be forthcoming at www.CFACT.tv. Comment and news also at www.CFACT.org, www.CLIMATEDEPOT.com & www.CFACT.eu.

- # # # -

CFACT to challenge UN in South Africa

Josh — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:35:43 +0000

COP 17, the UN Conference on Climate Change in Durban, South Africa, is only weeks away. Al Gore and his friends on the global warming fringe are pushing a radical agenda that would choke off our energy supply and tax, spend and regulate our economic recovery out of existence before it even gets started.

This is important.

We cannot allow climate propaganda and radical policies at the UN to go unchallenged.

CFACT has assembled an outstanding delegation of climate and policy experts to keep you informed about this important conference as it happens and to ensure your voice is heard in the negotiations.

We cannot do it alone. Join CFACT and become a key sponsor of this important diplomatic initiative. Your gift of any amount large or small, $25, $50, $100, $500 or more, the best help you can offer, is needed right now to permit us to inject vital information from Lord Christopher Monckton, Dr. Kelvin Kemm, Climate Depot’s Marc Morano, Nobel Peace Prize nominee Leon Louw, Professor Fred Singer and more into the negotiations.

President Obama would like to bypass the Senate and use this conference to commit us to a new rash of spending, regulation, redistribution and energy restrictions that will do great harm to our economy and freedoms. CFACT is taking on Obama, Gore and the UN on their home turf. We need your support and need it now.

CFACT Spins the Hamster Wheel on Obama’s Energy Plan

Josh — Fri, 11 Feb 2011 19:53:43 +0000

CFACT spins the wheel

Washington, D.C. — Collegians For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) is attending the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) with interactive criticism of President Barack Obama’s – a giant hamster wheel.

CFACT is allowing CPAC attendees to run in a human sized hamster wheel that powers a small light bulb. CFACT’s National Director Bill Gilles explains, “Considering the restrictions President Obama wants to put on energy production and the failure of government subsidized wind and solar, we may very well be reduced to running in the hamster wheel to produce the energy we need.”

According to CFACT’s policy advisor Paul Driessen, “America runs on abundant, reliable, affordable energy to support jobs and living standards, and power homes, schools, offices, factories, campuses, hospitals, computers and internet services. Nearly 85% of our nation’s energy still comes from oil, gas and coal. Making energy more expensive, less reliable and less accessible destroys jobs, reduces living standards, and hurts poor and minority families.”

President Obama stated on the campaign trail that, “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.

President Obama called for a “renewable portfolio standard” in his 2011 State of the Union Address. He wants 80% of America’s electricity to come from “clean energy sources” by 2035. Gilles commented, “The hamster wheel may be clean, but it’s no more practical than the wind and solar sources President Obama calls for.”

Driessen states that, “We need to let free markets tap America’s energy resources and creative potential. Government should set rules that prevent harm to people and the environment, and then let our vibrant marketplace create the technologies, opportunities and jobs we need.”

CFACT is borrowing the human sized hamster wheel from the Randolph College Physics Department. CFACT organizer Christina Wilson noted, “In no way should the generosity of the physics club be construed as an endorsement of our message, but we are grateful to them for lending us the wheel.”

####

Make your year-end contribution today!

Josh — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 18:49:18 +0000

It is time to say “well done, but now let’s get busy!” A year-end gift will help CFACT close the books on a very effective 2010, then hit the ground running in 2011. CFACT has become the preeminent organization presenting constructive alternatives to green radicalism that hold the left at bay. Your gift will have a direct impact on our educational programs and on our award-winning outreach. Whether it’s Climate Depot, campus activism, innovative analysis, first-rate journalism, sound science, lampooning hypocrisy, or going toe to toe with the UN on it’s own turf, CFACT is the best investment anyone can make who values liberty, prosperity, technology, free markets, and the rule of law. Join us. Together we can make a real difference in 2011.

Make your contribution today!

CFACT hosts energy poverty tour at UN climate conference

Josh — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:58:18 +0000

One the other side of the Cancun “Hotel Zoneria,” just 10 or 15 kilometers from downtown, live countless numbers of Mexican families without electricity, running water, or any of the other modern conveniences we in the developed world take for granted everyday.

It was to this other side that CFACT traveled, bringing delegates and reporters to see what energy poverty looks like, up-close and in-person. (Click here to read more)

CFACT is now funding the installation of the school’s first electric lights.

CFACT press conference: 1000+ scientists dissent on warming — The Morano Report

Christina — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 06:07:34 +0000

By Craig Rucker

Executive Director, The Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow

This was a big day for CFACT at COP16. We held our press conference in the Cancunmesse. The last few days have been jam packed.

Yesterday my colleague David Rothbard reported on the tour CFACT conducted of a Mexican village minutes from the conference where people live without electricity. While we heard tales of how hard it is to cook when you can’t afford fuel, Marc Morano, founder of CFACT’s award winning Climate Depot web site released a major new report which turns the idea of consensus science on its head.

Morano’s 321-page report lists 1,000 + scientists who dissent over man-made global warming. “I am ashamed of what climate science has become today,” Swedish climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring is quoted as saying in the report. “The science community is relying on an inadequate model to blame CO2 and innocent citizens for global warming in order to generate funding and to gain attention. If this is what ‘science’ has become today, I, as a scientist, am ashamed…Science is too important for our society to be misused in the way it has been done within the Climate Science Community.” At the press conference David Rothbard told those assembled that there is not now and never has been a scientific consensus supporting catastrophic man-made warming, nor is consensus an appropriate scientific approach. Science must be grounded in such inconvenient approaches as fact, openness and verification. The Morano report can be downloaded at www.ClimateDepot.com.

CFACT’s press conference featured Lord Christopher Monckton and Dr. Roy Spencer who co-developed NASA’s temperature measuring satellite service.

Dr. Spencer challenged a paper on cloud feedback released by Dr. Andrew Dessler in Science today. “Andy Dessler’s study will not stand hard scrutiny.” He told us. “COP16 delegates worried about the ongoing credibility problems of climate modeling will find no solace in Dessler’s work.” Dr. Spencer explained that prevailing climate models do not adequately account for feedbacks and are particularly weak in accounting for the effect of clouds which his research shows produce negative feedback. Prevailing climate models are not adequate to reliably predict future climate, overstate warming trends, and should not be used as a basis in which to undertake severe action.

Lord Monckton told us that policies being proposed at the conference pose a threat to national sovereignty and individual freedom. He released a statement which provides a peek into the massive bureaucracy proposed by climate campaigners. No one expects this bureaucracy to be effective at anything other than moving us another step towards ineffective world government, imposing massive burdens on working people and of course raking in cash.

COP16 has been marked by failure to advance a climate treaty with even UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon terming the negotiations “fruitless.” The climate debate, which started with bullying, name calling, fear and intimidation, is gradually becoming more balanced, despite the massive funds and resources available to promote alarmist views. Opinion polls show public acceptance of the case for catastrophic man-made global warming continuing to slide.

The best COP16 seems able to hope for at the moment is minor agreements, with a large transfer of wealth over deforestation the strongest prospect. No treaty appears possible at COP16 and no treaty is warranted. Both the science and proposed solutions to any warming are unsound. However, last-minute back room deals are always a possibility at these conferences. Anything arising from such a deal will be a negative and CFACT strongly warns against rushing in.

Absent a hail Mary pass it continues to look as if Kyoto will remain dead. With the warming scare subsiding and no new treaty likely, if your paycheck is dependent on the global warming industry, this would be a smart time to start seeking career counseling.

Statement of Dr. Roy W. Spencer

Christina — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 00:01:21 +0000

**The Dessler Cloud Feedback Paper in Science:**

Step Backward for Climate Research

Statement of Dr. Roy W. Spencer

Principal Research Scientist

The University of Alabama Huntsville

How clouds respond to warming – the ‘cloud feedback’ problem – will likely determine whether manmade global warming becomes either the defining environmental event of the 21^st Century, or is merely lost in the noise of natural climate variability.

Unfortunately, diagnosing cloud feedback from our global satellite observations has been surprisingly difficult. The problem isn’t the quality of the data, though. The problem is figuring out what the cloud and temperature behaviors we observe in the data mean in terms of cause and effect.

So, Andy Dessler’s (a Texas A&M climate researcher) new paper appearing in Science this week is potentially significant, for it claims to have greatly closed the gap in our understanding of cloud feedback.

Dessler’s paper claims to show that cloud feedback is indeed positive, and generally supportive of the cloud feedbacks exhibited by the IPCC computerized climate models. This would in turn support the IPCC’s claim that anthropogenic global warming will become an increasingly serious problem in the future.

Unfortunately, the central evidence contained in the paper is weak at best, and seriously misleading at worst. It uses flawed logic to ignore recent advancements we have made in identifying cloud feedback.

In fact, the new paper is like going back to using only X-rays for medical imaging when we already have MRI technology available to us.

What the New Study Shows

So what is this new evidence of positive cloud feedback that Dessler has published? Well, actually it is not new. It’s basically the same evidence we published in the Journal of Geophysical Research earlier this year, available at:

http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/Spencer-Braswell-JGR-2010.pdf

Yet we came to a very different conclusion, which was that the only clear evidence of feedback we found in the data was of strongly negative cloud feedback.

But how can this be? How can two climate researchers, using the same dataset, come to opposite conclusions?

The answer lies in an issue that challenges researchers in most scientific disciplines – separating cause from effect.

Dessler’s claim (and the IPCC party line) is that cloud changes are caused by temperature changes, and not the other way around. Causation only occurs in one direction, not the other.

In their interpretation, if one observes a warmer year being accompanied by fewer clouds, then that is evidence of positive cloud feedback. Why? Because if warming causes fewer clouds, it lets in more sunlight, which then amplifies the warming. That is positive cloud feedback in a nutshell.

But what if the warming was caused by fewer clouds, rather than the fewer clouds being caused by warming? In other words, what if previous researchers have simply mixed up cause and effect when estimating cloud feedbacks?

A Step Backwards for Climate Science

What we demonstrated in our JGR paper earlier this year is that when cloud changes cause temperature changes, it gives the illusion of positive cloud feedback – even if strongly negative cloud feedback is really operating!

I can not overemphasize the importance of that last statement.

We used essentially the same satellite dataset Dessler uses, but we analyzed those data with something called ‘phase space analysis’. Phase space analysis allows us to “see” behaviors in the climate system that would not be apparent with traditional methods of data analysis. It is like using an MRI to see a type of tumor that X-rays cannot reveal.

What we showed was basically a new diagnostic capability that can, to some extent, separate cause from effect. This is a fundamental advancement – and one that the news media largely refused to report on.

The Dessler paper is like someone publishing a medical research paper that claims those tumors do not exist, because they still do not show up on our latest X-ray equipment…even though the new MRI technology shows they exist!

Sound strange? Welcome to my world.

We even replicated that behavior see in the satellite data analyzed with phase space analysis — our ‘MRI for the climate system’ – by using a simple forcing-feedback climate model containing negative. We demonstrated that the same satellite data Dessler analyzed are actually showing negative cloud feedback, not positive feedback.

Why Dessler Assumed We Are Wrong

To Dessler’s credit, he actually references our paper. But he then immediately discounts our interpretation of the satellite data.

Why?

Because, as he claims, (1) most of the climate variability during the satellite period of record (2000 to 2010) was due to El Nino and La Nina (which is largely true), and (2) no researcher has ever claimed that El Nino or La Nina are caused by clouds.

This simple, blanket statement was then intended to negate all of the evidence we published.

But this is not what we were claiming, nor is it a necessary condition for our interpretation to be correct. El Nino and La Nina represent a temporary change in the way the coupled atmospheric-ocean circulation system operates. And any change in the atmospheric circulation can cause a change in cloud cover, which can in turn cause a change in ocean temperatures. We even showed this behavior for the major La Nina cooling event of 2007-08 in our paper!

It doesn’t mean that “clouds cause El Nino”, as Dessler suggests we are claiming, which would be too simplistic and misleading of a statement. Clouds are complicated beasts, and climate researchers ignore that complexity at their peril.

Very Curious Timing

Dessler’s paper is being announced on probably THE best day for it to support the IPCC’s COP-16 meeting here in Cancun, and whatever agreement is announced tomorrow in the way of international climate policy.

I suspect – but have no proof of it – that Dessler was under pressure to get this paper published to blunt the negative impact our work has had on the IPCC’s efforts.

But if this is the best they can do, the scientists aligning themselves with the IPCC really are running out of ideas to help shore up their climate models, and their claims that our climate system is very sensitive to greenhouse gas emissions.

The weak reasoning the paper employs – and the evidence we published which it purposely ignores! – combined with the great deal of media attention it will garner at a time when the IPCC needs to regain scientific respectability (especially after Climategate), makes this new Science paper just one more reason why the public is increasingly distrustful of the scientific community when it comes to research having enormous policy implications.

Dr. Roy W. Spencer is Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He was formerly a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA. He is co-developer of the original satellite method for precise monitoring of global temperatures from Earth-orbiting satellites. He has provided congressional testimony several times on the subject of global warming. He recently wrote, The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World’s Top Climate Scientist. In 2008 he wrote The New York Times bestseller, Climate Confusion.

Statement of the Viscount Monckton of Brenchley Negotiating the abdication of the West at COP16

Christina — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 18:21:44 +0000

Statement of the Viscount Monckton of Brenchley

Negotiating the abdication of the West at COP16

Cancun, Mexico, December 9, 2010

I usually add some gentle humor when I report. Not today. Read this and weep. Notwithstanding the carefully-orchestrated propaganda to the effect that nothing much will be decided at the UN climate conference here in Cancun, the decisions to be made here this week signal nothing less than the abdication of the West. The governing class in what was once proudly known as the Free World is silently, casually letting go of liberty, prosperity, and even democracy itself. No one in the mainstream media will tell you this, not so much because they do not see as because they do not bl**dy care.

The 33-page Note (FCCC/AWGLCA/2010/CRP.2) by the Chairman of the “Ad-Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Co-operative Action under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change”, entitled Possible elements of the outcome, reveals all. Or, rather, it reveals nothing, unless one understands what the complex, obscure jargon means. All UNFCCC documents at the Cancun conference, specifically including Possible elements of the outcome, are drafted with what is called “transparent impenetrability”. The intention is that the documents should not be understood, but that later we shall be told they were in the public domain all the time, so what are we complaining about?

Since the Chairman’s note is very long, I shall summarize the main points:

Finance: Western countries will jointly provide $100 billion a year by 2020 to an unnamed new UN Fund. To keep this sum up with GDP growth, the West may commit itself to pay 1.5% of GDP to the UN each year. That is more than twice the 0.7% of GDP that the UN has recommended the West to pay in foreign aid for the past half century. Several hundred of the provisions in the Chairman’s note will impose huge financial costs on the nations of the West.

The world-government Secretariat: In all but name, the UN Convention’s Secretariat will become a world government directly controlling hundreds of global, supranational, regional, national and sub-national bureaucracies. It will receive the vast sum of taxpayers’ money ostensibly paid by the West to the Third World for adaptation to the supposed adverse consequences of imagined (and imaginary) “global warming”.

Bureaucracy: Hundreds of new interlocking bureaucracies answerable to the world-government Secretariat will vastly extend its power and reach. In an explicit mirroring of the European Union’s method of enforcing the will of its unelected Kommissars on the groaning peoples of that benighted continent, the civil servants of nation states will come to see themselves as servants of the greater empire of the Secretariat, carrying out its ukases and diktats whatever the will of the nation states’ governments. Many of the new bureaucracies are disguised as “capacity-building in developing countries”. This has nothing to do with growing the economies or industries of poorer nations. It turns out to mean the installation of hundreds of bureaucratic offices answerable to the Secretariat in numerous countries around the world. Who pays? You do, gentle taxpayer. Babylon, Byzantium, the later Ottoman Empire, the formidable bureaucracy of Nazi Germany, the vast empire of 27,000 paper-shufflers at the European Union: add all of these together and multiply by 100 and you still do not reach the sheer size, cost, power and reach of these new subsidiaries of the Secretariat.

In addition to multiple new bureaucracies in every one of the 193 states parties to the Convention, there will be an Adaptation Framework Body, a Least Developed Countries’ Adaptation Planning Body, an Adaptation Committee, Regional Network Centers, an International Center to Enhance Adaptation Research, National Adaptation Institutions, a Body to Clarify Assumptins and Conditions in National Greenhouse-Gas Emission Reductions Pledges, a Negotiating Body for an Overall Level of Ambition for Aggregate Emission Reductions and Individual Targets, an Office to Revise Guidelines for National Communications, a Multilateral Communications Process Office, a Body for the Process to Develop Modalities and Guidelines for the Compliance Process, a Registry of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions by Developed Countries, a Body to Supervise the Process for Understanding Diversity of Mitigation Actions Submitted and Support Needed, a Body to Develop Modalities for the Registry of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions, an Office of International Consultation and Analysis; an Office to Conduct a Work Program for Development of Various Modalities and Guidelines; a network of Developing Countries’ National Forest Strategy Action Plan Offices; a network of National Forest Reference Emission Level And/Or Forest Reference Level Bodies; a network of National Forest Monitoring Systems; an Office of the Work Program on Agriculture to Enhance the Implementation of Article 4, Paragraph 1(c) of the Convention Taking Into Account Paragraph 31; one or more Mechanisms to Establish a Market-Based Approach to Enhance the Cost-Effectiveness Of And To Promote Mitigation Actions; a Forum on the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures; a Work Program Office to Address the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures; a Body to Review the Needs of Developing Countries for Financial Resources to Address Climate Change and Identify Options for Mobilization of Those Resources; a Fund in Addition to the Copenhagen Green Fund; an Interim Secretariat for the Design Phase of the New Fund; a New Body to Assist the Conference of the Parties in Exercising its Functions with respect to the Financial Mechanism; a Body to Launch a Process to Further Define the Roles and Functions of the New Body to Assist the Conference of the Parties in Exercising its Functions with respect to the Financial Mechanism; a Technology Executive Committee; a Climate Technology Center and Network; a Network of National, Regional, Sectoral and International Technology Centers, Networks, Organization and Initiatives; Twinning Centers for Promotion of North-South, South-South and Triangular Partnerships with a View to Encouraging Co-operative Research and Development; an Expert Workshop on the Operational Modalities of the Technology Mechanism; an International Insurance Facility; a Work Program Body for Policy Approaches and Positive Incentives on Issues Relating to Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries; a Body to Implement a Work Program on the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures; and a Body to Develop Modalities for the Operationalization of the Work Program on the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures.

The world government’s powers: The Secretariat will have the power not merely to invite nation states to perform their obligations under the climate-change Convention, but to compel them to do so. Nation states are to be ordered to collect, compile and submit vast quantities of information, in a manner and form to be specified by the secretariat and its growing army of subsidiary bodies. Between them, they will be given new powers to verify the information, to review it and, on the basis of that review, to tell nation states what they can and cannot do.

Continuous expansion: The verb “enhance”, in its various forms, occurs at least 28 times in the Chairman’s note, Similar verbs, such as “strengthen” and “extend”, and adjectives such as “scaled-up”, “new” and “additional”, are also frequently deployed, particularly in relation to funding at the expense of Western taxpayers. If all of the “enhancements” proposed in the note were carried out, the cost would comfortably exceed the annual $100 billion (or, for that matter, the 1.5% of GDP) that the note mentions as the cost to the West over the coming decade.

Intellectual property in inventions: Holders of patents, particularly in fields related to “global warming” and its mitigation, will be obliged to transfer the benefits of their inventiveness to developing countries without payment of royalties. This is nowhere explicitly stated in the Chairman’s note, but the transfer of technology is mentioned about 20 times in the draft, suggesting that the intention is still to carry out the explicit provision in the defunct Copenhagen Treaty draft of 15 September 2009 to this effect.

Insurance: The Secretariat proposes, in effect, to interfere so greatly in the operation of the worldwide insurance market that it will cease to be a free market, with the usual severely adverse consequences to everyone in that market.

The free market: The failed Copenhagen Treaty draft stipulated that the “government” that would be established would have the power to set the rules of all formerly free markets. There would be no such thing as free markets any more. In Cancun, the Chairman’s note merely says that various “market mechanisms” may be exploited by the Secretariat and by the parties to the Convention: but references to these “market mechanisms” are frequent enough to suggest that the intention remains to stamp out free markets worldwide.

Knowledge is power: The Chairman’s note contains numerous references to a multitude of new as well as existing obligations on nation states to provide information to the Secretariat, in a form and manner which it will dictate. The hand of the EU is very visible here. It grabbed power from the member-states in four stages: first, acting merely as a secretariat to ensure stable supplies of coal and steel to rebuild Europe after the Second World War; then as a registry requiring member states to supply it with ever more information; then as a review body determining on the basis of the information supplied by the member states whether they were complying with their obligations on the ever-lengthier and more complex body of European treaties; and finally as the ultimate law-making authority, to which all elected parliaments, explicitly including the European “Parliament”, were and are subject. Under the Cancun propsoals, the Secretariat is following the path that the plague of EU officials here have no doubt eagerly advised it to follow. It is now taking numerous powers not merely to require information from nation states but to hold them to account for their supposed international obligations under the climate-change Convention on the basis of the information the nations are now to be compelled to supply.

Propaganda: The Chairman’s note contains several mentions of the notion that the peoples of the world need to be told more about climate change. Here, too, there is a parallel with the EU, which administers a propaganda fund of some $250 million a year purely to advertise its own wonderfulness to an increasingly sceptical population. The IPCC already spends millions every year with PR agencies, asking them to find new ways of making its blood-curdling message more widely understood and feared among ordinary people. The Secretariat already has the advantage of an uncritical, acquiescent, scientifically illiterate, economically innumerate and just plain dumb news media: now it will have a propaganda fund to play with as well.

Damage caused by The Process: At the insistence of sensible nation states such as the United States, the Czech Republic, Japan, Canada, and Italy, the Cancun outcome acknowledges that The Process is causing, and will cause, considerable economic damage, delicately described in the Chairman’s note as “unintended side-effects of implementing climate-change response measures”. The solution? Consideration of the catastrophic economic consequences of the Secretariat’s heroically lunatic decisions will fall under the control of – yup – the Secretariat. Admire its sheer gall.

Damage to world trade: As the power, wealth and reach of the Secretariat grow, it finds itself rubbing uncomfortably up against other supranational organizations. In particular, the World Trade Organization has been getting antsy about the numerous aspects of the Secretariat’s proposals that constitute restrictions on international trade. At several points, the Chairman’s note expresses the “decision” – in fact, no more than an opinion and a questionable one at that – that the Secretariat’s policies are not restrictive of trade.

The Canute provision: The conference will reaffirm the decision of its predecessor in Copenhagen this time last year “to hold the increase in global average temperature below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels”, just like that. In fact, temperature in central England, and by implication globally, rose 2.2 Celsius in the 40 years 1695-1735, as the Sun began to recover from its 11,400-year activity minimum, and rose again by 0.74 C in the 20^th century. There has been no warming in the 21^st century, but we are already well over 2 Celsius degrees above pre-industrial levels. The Canute provision, as some delegates have dubbed it (after the Danish king of early England who famously taught his courtiers the limitations of his power and, a fortiori, theirs when he set up his throne on the beach and commanded sea level not to rise, whereupon the tide came in as usual and wet the royal feet), shows the disconnect between The Process and reality.

Omissions: There are several highly-significant omissions, which jointly and severally establish that the central intent of The Process no longer has anything to do with the climate, if it ever had. The objective is greatly to empower and still more greatly to enrich the international classe politique at the expense of the peoples of the West, using the climate as a pretext, so as to copy the European Union by installing in perpetuity what some delegates here are calling “transnational perma-Socialism” beyond the reach or recall of any electorate. Here are the key omissions:

Ø The science: The question whether any of this vast expansion of supranational power is scientifically necessary is not addressed. Instead, there is merely a pietistic affirmation of superstitious faith in the IPCC, where the conference will “recognize that deep cuts in global [greenhouse-gas] emissions are required according to science, and as documented in the [IPCC’s] Fourth Assessment Report.”

Ø The economics: There is no assessment of the extent to which any of the proposed actions to mitigate “global warming” by cutting emissions of carbon dioxide or to adapt the world to its consequences will be cost-effective. Nor, tellingly, is there any direct comparison between mitigation and adaptation in their cost-effectiveness: indeed, the IPCC was carefully structured so that mitigation and adaptation are considered by entirely separate bureaucracies producing separate reports, making any meaningful comparison difficult. Though every economic analysis of this central economic question, other than that of the now-discredited Lord Stern, shows that mitigation is a pointless fatuity and that focused adaptation to the consequences of any “global warming” that may occur would be orders of magnitude cheaper and more cost-effective, the Cancun conference outcome will continue to treat mitigation as being of equal economic utility with adaptation.

Ø Termination: Contracts have termination clauses to say what happens when the agreement ends. Nothing better illustrates the intent to create a permanent world-government structure than the absence of any termination provisions whatsoever in the Cancun outcome. The Process, like diamonds, is forever.

Ø Democracy: Forget government of the people, by the people, for the people. Forget the principle of “no taxation without representation” that led to the very foundation of the United States. The provisions for the democratic election of the new, all-powerful, legislating, tax-raising world-government Secretariat by the peoples of the world may be summarized in a single word: None.

How did this monstrous transfer of power from once-proud, once-sovereign, once-democratic nations to the corrupt, unelected Secretariat come about? The story begins with Sir Maurice Strong, an immensely wealthy UN bureaucrat from Canada who, a quarter of a century ago, established the IPCC as an intergovernmental, political body rather than as a scientific body precisely so that it could be maneuvered into assisting in the UN’s long-term aim, reiterated at a summit of senior UN officials this May by Ban Ki-Moon himself, of extinguishing national sovereignty and establishing a world government.

The Process began in earnest in 1988, when the IPCC was established. Shortly thereafter, on a June day in Washington DC deliberately chosen by Al Gore because it was unusually hot, his political ally and financial benefactor James Hansen appeared before a Congressional committee and put before it a wildly-exaggerated graph predicting global warming over the coming 20 or 30 years. Yet June 2008, the 20^th anniversary of his testimony, was cooler globally than June 1988, and worldwide warming has happened at less than half the rate he predicted.

The Rio Earth Summit in 1992 allowed environmental groups and world “leaders” to grandstand together. From that summit emerged the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which began holding annual conferences on “global warming”.

The Kyoto Protocol in 1997 committed its signatories to cut back their national CO2 emissions to 1990 levels by 2012. Most are not going to make it. The US Senate, with Al Gore as its president, voted 95-0 to reject any treaty such as Kyoto, which bound only the West while leaving developing nations such as China to emit carbon dioxide without constraint.

Very little progress had been made by the time of the Bali conference in 2007: but at that conference a “road-map” was constructed that was to lead to a binding international treaty in Copenhagen in 2009.

Just one problem with that. The US Constitution provides that, even if the President has signed a treaty, his signature is meaningless unless the treaty has been debated in the Senate, which must ratify it by the votes of at least 67 of the 100 Senators. It became clear to everyone, after the Obama administration failed to cajole or bully even 60 Senators into passing the Waxman/Markey cap-and-tax Bill, that no climate treaty would pass the Senate.

Worse, the Secretariat grossly overreached itself. Believing its own propaganda to the effect that none but a few vexatious, fossil-funded sceptics believed that “global warming” would be small enough to be harmless, it drafted and posted up on its website a 186-page draft Treaty of Copenhagen, proposing to turn itself into an unelected world government with unlimited powers to impose direct taxation on member nations without representation, recourse or recall, to interfere directly in the environmental policies of individual nations, and to sweep away all free markets worldwide, replacing them with itself as the sole rulemaker in every marketplace (treaty draft, annex 1, articles 36-38). Some quotations from the draft reveal the sheer ambition of the UN:

“The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism. … The government will be ruled by the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies.” (Copenhagen Treaty draft of September 15, 2009, para. 38).

The three central powers that the UN had hoped to grant itself under the guise of Saving The Planet from alleged climate catastrophe were as follows:

“Government”: This use of the word “government” is the first use of the term to describe a world government in any international treaty draft.

“Financial mechanism”: The “financial mechanism” was a delicate phrase to describe a new power of the UN to levy unlimited taxation directly on the peoples of its member states: taxation without representation, and on a global scale.

“Facilitative mechanism”: This mechanism would, for the first time, have given the UN he power directly to coerce and compel compliance on the part of its member states, by force if necessary. The Treaty draft describes it as –

“… a facilitative mechanism drawn up to facilitate the design, adoption and carrying out of public policies, as the prevailing instrument, to which the market rules and related dynamics should be subordinate.”

In short, there was to be a New World Order, with a “government” having at its command a “financial mechanism” in the form of unlimited rights to tax the world’s citizen’s directly, and a “facilitative mechanism” that would bring the rules of all formerly free markets under the direct control of the new UN “government”, aided by an already-expanding series of bureaucracies.

At no point anywhere in the 186 pages of the Treaty draft do the words “democracy”, “election”, “ballot”, or “vote” appear. As the EU has already demonstrated, the transfer of powers from sovereign democracies to supranational entities brings those democracies to an end. At the supranational level, in the UN, in the EU and in the proposed world government, decisions are not made by anyone whom we, the voters, have elected to make such decisions.

The exposure of the draft treaty in major international news media panicked the UN into abandoning the draft before the Copenhagen conference even began. Instead, the UN is now legislating crabwise, as the European Union does, with a series of successive annual agreements, the last of which was the Copenhagen Accord, each transferring more power and wealth from individual nations to its supranational bureaucracy. The latest of these agreements is being finalized here in Cancun.

The European Union, which has stealthily stamped out democracy over the past half-century by a series of treaties each transferring a little more power and wealth from elected hands in the member states to unelected hands in Brussels, has been advising the Secretariat on how to do the same on a global scale.

After the spectacular bloody nose the Secretariat got in Copenhagen, it was most anxious not to endure a second failure in Cancun. To this end, it obtained the agreement of the German government to host a monthly series of conferences in Bonn in the early part of 2010, some of which were open to outside observers and some were behind closed doors in a comfortable suburban palace, where the new way of legislating for the world – in secret – first came into use.

The Chinese regime, anxious to get a piece of the action, agreed to host an additional session in Tientsin a few weeks ago. The purpose of this near-perpetual international junketing – which the national delegates have greatly enjoyed at our expense – was to make sure that nearly all of the elements in the Cancun agreement were firmly in draft and agreed well before Cancun, so as to avoid what too many journalists have tediously and obviously described as a “Mexican stand-off”.

It is precisely because of all this massive and expensive preparation that the note by the Chairman, whose main points are summarized above, may well reflect what is finally decided and announced here in a couple of days’ time. The Chairman is not simply guessing: this Note reflects what the Secretariat now confidently expects to get away with.

However, following the Copenhagen disaster, our grim future New Masters are taking no chances. They persuaded their friends in the mainstream news media, who cannot now easily back out of their original declarations of blind faith in the Church of “Global Warming” and are as anxious not to lose face as the Secretariat is, to put it about that at Cancun this year and even at Durban next year very little of substance will occur.

The intention is that, after not one but two international climate conferences, the second of them in Rio in 2012 on the 20^th anniversity of the Earth Summit that began it all, the Secretariat will have become so wealthy and will have accreted so much power to itself that no one – not even the US Senate – will dare to resist ratifying the Treaty of Rio that brings democracy to an end worldwide and fulfils Lord Mandelson’s recent statement that “we are now living in a post-democratic age.”

Over my dead body. The people know best what is best for the people. The governing class no doubt knows what is best for the governing class, but does not necessarily know what is best for the people, and must always be kept in check by the ballot-box.

If we are to have a world government at all (and, as the science of “global warming” alarm continues to collapse, the current pretext for world domination by a privileged few is wearing more than a little thin), then it is essential that the world government should be an elected government, and that, as Article 1, Section 1 of the US Constitution makes plain when it grants “All legislative power” to the elected Congress and to the now-elected Senate, none shall make laws for the world or impose taxes upon the world except those whom the people of the world have elected by universal secret ballot.

How can we, the people, defeat the Secretariat and keep the democracy we love? Simply by informing our elected representatives of the scope, ambition, and detail of what is in the Cancun agreement. The agreement will not be called a “Treaty”, because the Senate, particularly after the mid-term elections, will not pass it. But it can still be imposed upon us by the heavily Left-leaning Supreme Court, which no longer makes any pretence at judicial impartiality and may well decide, even if Congress does not, that the Cancun agreement shall stand part of US law on the ground that it is “customary international law”.

I call on COP16 delegates and the citizens of the world to repent of this dangerous course and so inform their government officials. It is the power of individual nations and individual citizens that is being taken away. It is democracy, that will perish from the Earth unless this burgeoning nonsense is stopped.

_______________

Lord Christopher Monckton, Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, has been a leader of CFACT’s delegations to numerous UN summits. He has held positions with the British press and in government, as a press officer at the Conservative Central Office and as Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s policy adviser. Monckton advised Thatcher on technical issues such as warship hydrodynamics, psephological modeling; embryological research, hydrogeology, public-service investment analysis, public welfare modeling, and epidemiological analysis. He is author of a detailed analysis and summary of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes’s Fourth Assessment Report.

Meet the skeptics at CFACT’s COP16 press conference Monckon, Spencer & Rothbard on Climate Science & Policy

Christina — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 18:19:11 +0000

MEDIA ADVISORY

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Wolfgang Mueller

December 9, 2010 (+521) 998 225 9854

Meet the skeptics at CFACT’s COP16 press conference

Monckon, Spencer & Rothbard on Climate Science & Policy

EXTRAS: Dr. Roy Spencer to debunk cloud feedback study w/in hour of its release

Climate Depot releases 321 page report – over 1,000 skeptical scientists

(Cancun, Mexico) CFACT will hold a press conference on Thursday, December 9^th, at 3:00 PM in the Cancunmesse, room Desierto. This will be an opportunity for journalists to balance their coverage of COP16 by listening to all points of view. This is particularly important as the scientific case for catastrophic man-made global warming continues to erode along with public support around the globe

Science will release Dr. Andrew Dessler’s new paper on cloud feedback at 2 PM (EST) on Thursday and Dr. Roy Spencer will release a statement at CFACT’s press conference which raises serious questions about the study and details its flaws. “Andy Dessler’s study will not stand hard scrutiny. COP16 delegates worried about the ongoing credibility problems of climate modeling will find no solace in Dessler’s work,” Spencer said.

Lord Christopher Monckton will skewer the flaws in climate science & policy and discuss the threat a climate treaty poses for national sovereignty and individual freedom.

Wednesday Marc Morano, founder of CFACT’s Climate Depot, released a 321 page report listing over 1,000 scientists who dissent over man-made global warming which Morano termed a “consensus buster.”

Wednesday CFACT brought COP16 delegates and press to tour a local village without electricity to show the impacts of energy poverty. CFACT is installing electric light in the village school for the first time.

Dr. Roy W. Spencer is Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama Huntsville. He was formerly a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA. He co-developed the original satellite method for precise monitoring of global temperatures from Earth-orbiting satellites. He has provided congressional testimony on the subject of global warming. He recently wrote, The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World’s Top Climate Scientists. In 2008 he wrote The NY Times bestseller, Climate Confusion.

Lord Christopher Monckton, Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, has been a leader of CFACT’s delegations to numerous UN summits. He has held positions with the British press and in government, as a press officer at the Conservative Central Office and as Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s policy adviser. Monckton advised Thatcher on technical issues such as warship hydrodynamics, psephological modeling; embryological research, hydrogeology, public-service investment analysis, public welfare modeling, and epidemiological analysis. He is author of a detailed analysis and summary of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes’s Fourth Assessment Report.

David Rothbard is president of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) a public policy organization he co-founded in 1985. He co-hosts a daily radio commentary called Just the Facts, which airs on over 100 radio stations. His articles have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, the Washington Times and many others. He has particpated in over a dozen UN conferences.

CFACT is an international public policy organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. which promotes market and technological solutions to issues of environment and development.

- # # #-

Seeing the face of energy poverty, up-close, in Cancun

Christina — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 05:40:06 +0000

By CFACT President David Rothbard

CFACT visits the Mexican Village "La Libertad"

On one side of this tropical strip, UN delegates, media, and observers shuttle between luxurious hotels, posh restaurants, a white sandy beach with turquoise water, and a modern convention center where they spend their time bemoaning man-made climate change and planning the energy future for the rest of the globe. One the other side of the Cancun “Hotel Zoneria,” just 10 or 15 kilometers from downtown, live countless numbers of Mexican families without electricity, running water, or any of the other modern conveniences we in the developed world take for granted everyday. It was to this other side that CFACT traveled today, bringing delegates and reporters to see what energy poverty looks like, up-close and in-person. “As COP16 participants consider the future of the world’s energy policy, it is vital that the voices of those suffering energy poverty are heard,” I said in our announcement.

Children from the school gathered to hear Rothbard speak

So off we went in a convoy of white vans – Germans and Kenyans and Americans and Kazahkstanis and English and Tawainese and others – to see a side of Cancun featured in no magazines or travelogs. Fifteen minutes on the highway headed through the Yucatan jungle, another five minutes or so on Merida Road, and then a bumpy, twisting ride over a pothole scarred back road, and there we were, in the Comunidad de La Libertad, more easily known as “Community of Freedom” back in Des Moines or Omaha. One young mother graciously agreed to let us visit her makeshift house – made of some wood planks and stone and a bit of cement – and share with us how she and her family live. After telling us through a translator that “her heart was beating out of her chest because she’s never had any visitors like this,” she went on to show the sparse interior of her abode, and then took us outside where most of her work is done. She cooks most food in an old metal barrel over an open fire – tortillas on a metal pan or beans boiling in a pot of water – because she can only afford a little gas for her indoor stove, and wouldn’t waste a week’s worth of energy on one pot of beans. Thus, she and her two little children get to breathe in the smoke from the cooking fire; smoke that kills an estimated two to three million women and children around the world each year from respiratory diseases. There is no plumbing or proper sanitation – just an outhouse-style bathroom where basin baths and other necessities are attended to. Clothes-washing is done by hand, taking hours of time, and water comes from a small hand-pumped well that provides relatively convenient, but certainly not uncontaminated, water.

Running water is not a "luxury" for the people in this village.

One son is able to attend school, but the younger daughter, age five, is not able to attend because even though tuition is free, there are small expenses associated with going to school that can’t be met on her husband’s one-day-yes, one-day-no part-time labor. So the delegates looked, and listened, and asked questions – and were thankful for having the chance to get away from the UN gabfest, and remember who it is that actually has the most skin in the climate and energy game. “It is one thing to talk about poverty, but it is another to come here in person – where you can feel it,” commented one representative from India who joined the CFACT tour. “I would have left anything at the summit to come here and see this,” he added. But for others, the visit was surprising from an opposite perspective. One delegate from Tanzania said the women’s house would be like a palace back home, and that his own mother doesn’t have a house even half as good. But maybe that’s not so surprising after all, since 90% of those living in sub-Saharan Africa have no electricity, and children there must also do their homework by candlelight or paraffin lamps, as CFACT demonstrated when it organized a visit with local Kenyan schoolchildren during the COP12 meeting in Nairobi. CFACT’s energy poverty tour of Cancun ended on a joyful note as the group visited the local elementary school of La Libertad – the sole school in the area for four large communities – and sponsored a small lunchtime fiesta for the children complete with a mariachi band, piñatas, and a magician. CFACT also pledged to provide the school with its first electric lights. In remarks at the school, I noted that CFACT’s “adopt a village” program actually started in Cancun in 2003 during the WTO summit when the group began a relationship with a neighboring community, delivering two tons of food and visiting three more times over the next few years to provide solar ovens and panels, laptops, and various cleanup efforts. “For many years, we merely talked about public policy, but in 2003, we decided to actually get involved hands-on, and work alongside communities to help lift them out of poverty.” Despite such hopeful efforts, the sad reality remains that many global warming campaigners are here in Cancun proposing treaty provisions that would do nothing to affect the climate. But they would callously trap millions of families, like the one we visited today, in perpetual energy poverty.

CFACT is helping people like these children avoid the energy poverty trap.

CFACT hosts tour of energy poor village of La Libertad at Cancun climate talks Escaping the climate energy trap

Christina — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 01:28:20 +0000

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Wolfgang Mueller

Wednesday, December 8, 2010 (+521) 998 225 9854

(Cancun, Mexico) Few things divide rich from poor like access to affordable energy. In this 21^st century it has been estimated that 1.4 billion people lack access to electricity while 3 billion people cook with solid fuel. On Wednesday, December 8, CFACT transported COP16 delegates, press and observers to the Mexican village of La Libertad, where people cook, heat and live without electricity. La Libertad presents a compelling picture of the plight of the energy poor.

“As COP16 considers the future of the world’s energy policy, it is vital that the voices of those suffering energy poverty are heard,” said CFACT President David Rothbard.

“Today’s visit was both sobering and inspiring,” Rothbard said. “We and our guests saw the harsh realities of what life is like without basic necessities, such as electricity, which we take for granted. Yet among the people of La Libertad we saw remarkable joyfulness and hope in the midst of poverty – especially among the many school children – this humbled us. CFACT believes these children deserve every opportunity that our children enjoy, including affordable, abundant electricity and all the benefits that brings. We must not set energy policy in a vacuum and create obstacles to the progress of countless communities like La Libertad.”

Access to affordable energy has led to a cleaner, greener environment and a rebound of natural habitats and wildlife throughout the developed world. Efficient agriculture and distribution, both of which require abundant energy, permit developed nations to devote less land to food production, while minimizing the need to forage for wood for cooking and heating.

Billions know a different reality. Energy poverty means a life without the nutrition, health care, refrigeration, jobs, information and education the rest of us take for granted. Without electricity, foraging for food and fuel leads to deforestation and pressures wildlife, while an estimated 1-2 million people die every year from respiratory diseases linked to the burning of wood, charcoal, dung and other solid fuels.

CFACT has worked for years with impoverished people around the world including Valle Verde and other villages in the Yucatan peninsula and witnessed the consequences of energy poverty first hand.

“Global warming campaigners are here in Cancun proposing treaty provisions that would frustrate recovery for developed economies while doing nothing to alter the climate,” said Craig Rucker, CFACT’s Executive Director. “It is vital we also turn our attention to those in the developing world whom too many are callously willing to trap in energy poverty permanently. Wealthy activists advocating policies that hold the poor down makes for a sorry spectacle indeed. Payoffs to developing countries to do without efficient energy will benefit elites in those countries while leaving the needy behind. This is a disaster for both the energy poor and the working people who pay the bills.”

International aid should focus on helping developing nations construct an efficient energy infrastructure including electricity generation and transmission. Rucker said, “For villages like La Libertad if there is energy, there is hope.”

- # # #-

Media invited to tour energy-poor village of La Libertad near COP16 summit

Christina — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 06:11:38 +0000

MEDIA ADVISORY

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Wolfgang Mueller

December 7, 2010 (+521) 998 225 9854

Media invited to tour energy-poor village of La Libertad near COP16 summit

(Cancun, Mexico) On Wednesday, December 8^th, CFACT will bring COP16 delegates and press to tour La Libertad, a Mexican community only minutes from the comforts of the Cancun tourist zone, where the poor live without electricity. CFACT will provide transportation which will depart the Westin Hotel (first stop on COP16 shuttle one) at 9:30 AM. Return approximately 1 PM. Lunch provided.

Participants will visit with local people, learn about the challenges of living without electricity, and then spend some light-hearted time with village school children. CFACT is working with local organizers to install electric lights in the community school for the first time.

CFACT regularly provides assistance to local villages to help them develop. Over the years CFACT has provided electricity, computers, food and environmental cleanups in the Cancun area.

CFACT president David Rothbard said, “As delegates to COP16 consider the future of the world’s energy policy, it is vital that the voices of those suffering energy poverty are heard.”

If you would like to participate please call (+521) 998 225 9854 or email CFACT@CFACT.org.

Visit to La Libertad, an energy-poor village

Depart: Westin Hotel 9:30 AM

Return: Approximately 1 PM

Lunch & Transportation Provided

RSVP Required

- # # #-

UN climate kooks want to cripple US economy and ban H2O

Christina — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 06:04:45 +0000

Some people will sign anything that includes phrases like, ”global effort,” “international community,” and “planetary.” Such was the case at COP 16, this year’s United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Cancun, Mexico.

This year, CFACT students created two mock-petitions to test U.N. Delegates. The first asked participants to help destabilize the United States economy, the second to ban water.

The first project, entitled “Petition to Set a Global Standard” sought to isolate and punish the United States of America for defying the international community, by refusing to bite, hook, line and sinker on the bait that is the Kyoto Protocol. The petition went so far as to encourage the United Nations to impose tariffs and trade restrictions on the U.S. in a scheme to destabilize the nation’s economy. Specifically, the scheme seeks to lower the U.S. GDP by 6% over a ten year period, unless the U.S. signs a U.N. treaty on global warming.

This would be an extremely radical move by the United Nations. Even so, radical left-wing environmentalists from around the world scrambled eagerly to sign.

The second project was as successful as the first. It was euphemistically entitled “Petition to Ban the Use of Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO)” (translation water). It was designed to show that if official U.N. delegates could be duped by college students into banning water, that they could essentially fall for anything, including pseudo-scientific studies which claim to show that global warming is man-caused.

Despite the apparently not-so-obvious reference to H2O, almost every delegate that collegian students approached signed their petition to ban that all too dangerous substance, which contributes to the greenhouse effect, is the major substance in acid rain, and is fatal if inhaled.

Perhaps together, the footage associated with these two projects will illustrate to mainstream America the radical lengths many current U.N. delegates are willing to go to carry out an agenda no more ethical, plausible or practical than the banning water.

Lord Monckton Presents CFACT’s Kook of the Week

Christina — Tue, 07 Dec 2010 02:51:00 +0000

Lord Christopher Monckton, renowned science and policy expert, presents CFACT’s Kook of the Week. This gentleman was found at the UN Conference on Climate Change in Cancun, Mexico. Enjoy!

The Cost of Energy Poverty

Christina — Sat, 04 Dec 2010 17:12:57 +0000

CFACT Collegians protest the UN in advocacy against energy poverty.

Sitting, listening to the ocean in Cancun, Mexico, one realizes how truly fortunate we are. As students, we are here, representing CFACT at the 2010 United Nations Climate Change Conference. It is a bit ironic then, that we are writing this in the sun, by the pool, at a Hotel, with the purpose of bringing light to the issue of Energy Poverty.

The irony continues…here we sit in one of the touristy places in the country of Mexico, while less than 50 miles away are some of the very people we are talking about. Even in Mexico, there are people living without basic electricity. While those people are going about their daily lives, trying to make enough money to support their families. According to the World Economic Forum, an estimated 3 billion people worldwide are living without sustainable or affordable energy, yet Delegates at the UNFCCC debate energy treaties that would place such necessities as electricity out of reach.

It is not, however, just those people in developing countries who would be effected by such measures that are being proposed, but also those in nations like the United States. The documentary, It’s not Evil, Just Wrong, introduces some of the average, hard working American’s who would be extremely impacted in the most negative way by a shut down, or cut back, in the coal industry. There are many families in the United States barely making ends meat with energy costs as high as they are currently and many families would go belly-up if those costs were increased, as they will be if the UNFCCC delegates get their way. There may be room to tighten the belt in the Gore family, as they live in their Nashville mansion and Al flies around on his private jet, but most Americans are barely breathing with how tight their finances have become in the past few years.

When Lord Christopher Monckton came in and talked to us the first day and we discussed energy poverty he mentioned how the cost of energy has almost doubled in the last couple of years. There was a big report that came out that said “Global Warming” was going to kill 21,000 people because the earth was getting to be too hot. However, in a cold snap that recently happened in England, 21,000 people died because they didn’t have enough money to pay for heat. That in itself is a huge problem; people shouldn’t be dying because the cost of energy is so high that they cant afford it. The loss of 21,000 in a decade due to global warming is tragic, but the loss of 21,000 people in a three month period is completely unacceptable.

The faces of Energy Poverty can be seen around the world in both developed and developing nations, and we cannot afford the cost of higher energy bills. The cost will not be solely monetary, but human.

Collegians handed out ribbons that said, "End Energy Poverty Now!"

Collegians hand out ribbons inside the conference.

Exclusive CFACT interview: UN climate chief Pachauri ignorant of 15 years without warming

Josh — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 15:37:15 +0000

Cancun, Mexico–At COP16, the UN Climate Change Conference in Cancun, CFACT had the opportunity to interview the chair of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Rajendra Pachauri.

When asked about the fact that there has been no statistically significant global warming for the past 15 years, Pachauri became evasive. Even Phil Jones, a climatologist at the University of East Anglia and a prominent global warming alarmist, admitted this fact in the wake of Climategate.

A year after Climategate, however, the IPCC’s Pachauri still refuses to face reality and clings to the deeply flawed 4th Assessment Report, which has been completely discredited over the past year after it was revealed that many of its supposedly “peer-reviewed sources” were actually based on activist reports and interviews with hikers.

“This interview revealed that the IPCC chair is ignorant of some very basic facts about global warming,” said CFACT’s Executive Director, Craig Rucker. “This is particularly striking in light of all the criticism being poured on the IPCC by scientists and independent review panels for its sloppy handling of key data and vital information.”

Most tellingly, while Pachauri agreed that global carbon dioxide emissions have been increasing for the last 15 years, he was at a loss to say how much global temperatures had increased during that same time. That seems like a pretty basic piece of information for the head of the UN’s climate panel to know, but Pahauri has revealed his ignorance once again.

Marc Morano exposes climate redistribution on Fox

michael — Sun, 28 Nov 2010 00:22:30 +0000

CLICK TO VIEW

CFACT to feature prominent experts at UN climate conference

Josh — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 19:44:24 +0000

(Cancun, Mexico) CFACT, the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, will feature two prominent experts on climate science and policy at COP 16, the UN conference on climate change which convenes next week in Cancun.

Lord Christopher Monckton will be in Cancun December 1 – 10.
Dr. Roy Spencer will be in Cancun December 6 – 10.
Both will be available (allowing for travel) for radio and media interviews before and after Cancun.

Last year COP 15 in Copenhagen ended without serious progress on a successor treaty to the Kyoto protocol. A series of meetings in Germany and China were likewise inconclusive. The UNFCCC is under severe pressure to jump start the treaty process in Mexico, however, public doubts about climate science and policy coupled with an inability of developed and developing nations to find common ground leave the UNFCCC with a daunting task ahead.

With billions at stake for carbon traders (whose markets expire with the Kyoto protocol), warming science and policy campaigners, developing nations and subsidized industries in Cancun, the push for a new treaty will be fierce. The treaty proposals being circulated impose crippling costs and regulations that will choke off economic recovery while doing nothing to alter the climate. CFACT, Dr. Spencer and Lord Monckton will open minds and effectively challenge a scientific “consensus” that never was, detail global warming’s scope, causes and effects, separate smart energy strategies from waste and skewer the global warming lobby’s propaganda and abusive tactics.

Dr. Roy W. Spencer is a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He was formerly a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA. He is co-developer of the original satellite method for precise monitoring of global temperatures from Earth-orbiting satellites. He has provided congressional testimony several times on the subject of global warming. He recently wrote, The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World’s Top Climate Scientists. In 2008 he wrote The New York Times bestseller, Climate Confusion.

Lord Christopher Monckton, Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, has been a leader of CFACT’s delegations to numerous UN summits. He has held positions with the British press and in government, as a press officer at the Conservative Central Office and as Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s policy advisor. Monckton advised Thatcher on technical issues such as warship hydrodynamics, psephological modeling; embryological research, hydrogeology, public-service investment analysis, public welfare modeling, and epidemiological analysis. He is author of a detailed analysis and summary of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fourth Assessment Report.

Dr. Roy Spencer

Josh — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 19:00:12 +0000

Dr. Roy W. Spencer is a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville where he performs original weather and climate research with NASA’s latest satellite observations of the Earth. He was formerly a Senior Scientist for Global Climate Studies at NASA, where he co-developed of the original satellite method for precise monitoring of global temperatures from Earth-orbiting satellites. This work led to NASA awarding him and Dr. John Christy their Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal. Dr. Spencer’s work with NASA continues as the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite. He has provided congressional testimony several times on the subject of global warming. Dr. Spencer’s research has been entirely supported by U.S. government agencies: NASA, NOAA, and DOE.

Spencer authored the 2008 New York Times bestseller, Climate Confusion. His most recent book, The Great Global Warming Blunder, unveils new scientific findings that explode the conventional wisdom on climate change and reshape the global warming debate as we know it. These findings were recently published in the Journal of Geophysical Research.

Lord Christopher Monckton

Lene — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:08:47 +0000

Please click image for high resolution photo.

Lord Monckton is a business consultant and former policy advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. He has been a vocal critic of global warming proponents and the conclusions of the IPCC. In November 2006, he published in The Daily Telegraph a widely publicized article critical of the prevailing climate change opinions. After U.S. Senators Rockefeller and Snowe wrote a letter to the Chief Executive Officer of ExxonMobil asking him to stop funding scientists who reject global warming, Lord Monckton wrote a letter to the senators reminding them of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and calling on them to reverse their position or resign. In February 2007, he published an analysis and summary of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report on climate change.

David Rothbard

Lene — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:00:35 +0000

David Rothbard is president and co-founder of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) in 1985, and has served as chairman and president of the organization since its inception. He has provided vision, guidance, and oversight to help build CFACT into a global presence, with activities on three continents and the support of more than 40 internationally-recognized scientists and experts. Rothbard has testified before Congress and various state legislatures; is a regular speaker on college campuses and at policy gatherings in the U.S. and around the world; and has led delegations to numerous U.N. environmental summits including those in Cairo, Kyoto, Buenos Aires, the Hague, Johannesburg, and Nairobi. He is a frequent guest on radio and television talk shows, and his work has been printed or critiqued in such publications as Newsweek, the Houston Chronicle, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Washington Times, and The Wall Street Journal. Rothbard is also now spearheading the creation of model demonstration projects in impoverished villages in Latin America and Africa. He is a graduate of Fairfield University in Connecticut, with a degree in political science. He and his wife, Kelly, are the proud parents of three daughters in suburban Maryland.

Craig Rucker

Lene — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:58:10 +0000

Craig Rucker is the executive director and co-founder of CFACT. He is a native of Buffalo, New York, who received his Masters of Public Administration from the State University of New York at Albany, Craig Rucker is a co-founder of CFACT and currently serves as its executive director. For over 20 years, Craig has provided expertise to a wide range of government, academic, media, and industry forums. He serves as co-host of CFACT’s daily national radio commentary called “Just the Facts” that has been airing on some 125 radio stations from coast to coast since 1993. Rucker has written extensively on numerous environmental policy issues, and his work has been featured in such media outlets as CNN, the BBC, USA Today, the Des Moines Register, the Cleveland Plain-Dealer, The Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post. Rucker has had primary responsibility for helping build CFACT’s Collegians program on more than 20 campuses in nine states, and has attended or brought student delegations to major United Nations conferences in Istanbul, Kyoto, Bonn, Marrakesh, Cancun, and Montreal. Rucker has a wife and four sons, and currently resides in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia.

Monckton refutes Abraham, Introduction

Christina — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:13:10 +0000