Jon Christian Ryter's Conservative World

Internet Articles (2012)
Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2009)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)
Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)

From The Mailbag

Books
Order Book

Cyrus
Rednecker

Search

About
Comments

Links

If you read the Big 25 global leftwing newspapers they will assure
you that opinion polls show overwhelming support for the idea of
curbing greenhouse gases and using carbon trading and carbon
credits to achieve that goal. Only, the leftwing papers are vague on
what polls...and which demographics were actually surveyed. Ask
anyone how carbon credit trading works, and most of them will be
clueless—except those who have been sucked in by the scheme
will assure you it's [a] very important because all of the important
people are involved in it, and [b] it's the only hope the world has of
mitigating global warming.

For those who view global warming as an Al Gore scheme, or at best a well-intentioned but ill-conceived United States ecoalarmist idea, its important for them to realize that the global scheme to buy and sell carbon credits to reduce man's carbon footprints on Earth in order to mitigate global warming, is a transnational climate fraud perpetuated against the global working class by the world's elites who are rapidly transforming the nation-states into what can only be described as George Orwell's 1984.

Delegates to the 2010 Cancun UN Climate Change Conference (originally billed as the UN Global Warming Conference) experienced the reason for the name change when they arrived in Cancun, Mexico to hammer out the "important" details of Cap & Trade after the non-binding Copenhagen Accord was completed in December, 2009. Like the blizzards and cold weather that greeted them in Denmark, the conference delegates who had hoped for tropical weather experienced the coldest weather in Cancun in over 100 years. This was the 16th global warming summit—referred to in political company as the 16th Conference of the Parties or COP-16.

The delegates who attended the Copenhagen Conference were environmental idealists who actually thought global warming was taking place—even in the blizzards that greeted the delegates as they arrived in Denmark. Attendees at Cancun who likely expected semi-tropical weather when they planned their trips, were greeted with new record low "high" temperatures of 54°, and with even new lower temperatures coming later in the week. And, of course, they were also greeted with the trite expression: "weather is not climate"—with the UN World Meteorological Organization reminding attendees that 2010 will be remembered as one of the three warmest years since 1850.

What was not discussed at all during the Cancun Climate Conference was weather. Not discussed was the reality that since the end of Solar Cycle 24 in 2008, real scientists were predicting that the planet would experience what they called a "solar minimum" by 2040 with increasing icy weather well into 2100 or beyond. The Cancun climate con was not about climate change—it was about the changing national wealth. From the United States to the third world since global warming is being blamed on the people of the United States and its industrial allies in Europe.

In other words—if you didn't get it—the Climate Con was not about solving problems, it was about assigning financial blame. Before the conference started, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group III [IPCC] co-chairman, Pttmar Edenhofer said that COP-16 actually has "...almost nothing to do with environmental policy..." its real purpose "...is redistributing the world's wealth and natural resources..." from the industrialized nations to the third world.

British Viscount Christopher Monckton called it "...a monstrous transfer of power from once-proud, once-sovereign, once-democratic nations." And IPCC Executive Secretary Christina Figueres summed it up before conference attendees when she said: "The world is looking for new answers to the political, economic and social changes which all countries face." She explained that these "new answers" were centered on how much money the developed nations owe to the poor countries of the world. Nothing sums up the global warming debate than her assessment of the "new answer."

Marc Morano of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) and ClimateDepot.com, said it best for the rest of us: "If this is what science has become I, as a scientist, am ashamed."