By Dr. Lubos Motl
The acceleration of the climate hysteria peaked in 2005-2007 – remember Katrina and all the Nobel prizes for Al Gore and similar disgusting events – and the speed of the building climate hysteria has probably peaked around 2009 during the ClimateGate. But all this new age religion kept on solidifying afterwards – although more silently.
Finally, we have some indications that the climate bubble could start to burst. Last night, the media informed us about a nice beginning of a climate conference (COP24) in Katowice, Poland (coverage; Katowice is 45 miles from Ostrava, Czechia – a vital black coal region is in between the two cities). Representatives of the countries were ordered to invent the optimal celebration of a recent IPCC report, the starkest one in many years. That report roughly said:
People can’t be satisfied if 2 °C is avoided. 1.5 °C of warming (from an incorrectly, arbitrarily, and vaguely defined pre-industrial era) has to be avoided. With this goal in mind, countries have to completely change how they work, the economies have to be fudged up, and climate liars have to be promoted from millionaires to billionaires. We demand these recommendations to be welcome by the representatives of countries and by the ministers who attend the event in Katowice.
Among other things. Delegates from the countries did something surprising – for the fearmongers. They refused to accept the word “welcome”. After 2.5 of disagreements, the word “noted” was used. The latest report was only noted, not welcome. Russia, America, Saudis, and Kuwait teamed up to make this improvement.
“Welcome” is the verb describing what Angela Merkel wants to do with millions of illegal Muslim immigrants. It involves some huge subsidies and uncritical celebration. “Note” has been translated as “we are aware of the existence of some written garbage out there”. If you’re sensitive about the nuances, this single verb changes the content.
But it’s pretty funny that the change of one verb, from “welcomed” to “noted”, has led to this immense hysteria among the alarmist whackadoodles who are already hysterical about the climate fairy-tales themselves. I wonder what these crooks’ hysteria is going to look like when they’re finally transferred to prisons en masse.
It is obvious that the U.S., Saudis, Russia, and Kuwait aren’t random countries. They are countries with significant revenues from fossil fuels. Due to the fracking revolution, the U.S. recently overtook the Saudis and Russia’s output is close to these two. I guess that when the gas is included, Russia jumps higher, perhaps to the top. Kuwait is surely punching above its weight. These oil-rich and gas-rich countries were de facto accompanied by the silent Australia and others.
The representatives of the alarmists weren’t happy.
97% of the countries agree on the consensus. A ludicrously tiny group of denier nations don’t have the right to block our progress in the fight against climate change,
said the delegate from the most important alarmist country, the Maldives, through her spokesman, a kitty-tiger. It’s a nice point that the deniers are only 3% of the countries that participate. But it may be helpful to note that they produce most of the fossil fuels and also own about 90% of the world’s nuclear warheads, among many other things. 😉
On Friday, I gave a talk on climate change, “Climate Change Is a Law, Not a Threat”, to a group of some 100 folks, mostly IT folks doing operating systems, at a cool pension or conference center in South Bohemia (above the last meander of the Otava River before it joins the Moldau). It was fun, the food was unbelievably good over there. There were 6 other very interesting talks about hacking and microprocessor glitches, geology, teaching, exercise with rubber, Czech physicians’ missions in Kenya, influence of Socrates’ and Plato’s morality on the birth of Christianity (plus other things about religions and science). Drinking with de facto soulmates during the night, short trips around.
The responses solidified my view that the climate hysteria is being driven by a truly tiny group of ideologically motivated extremists and basically no one else agrees with them. I did know in advance who would be my main opponent there – and the reality confirmed my expectations qualitatively and surpassed them quantitatively. The “social ecologist” who tried to torpedo all the basic things I had to say is an extremely good speaker – and I do recognize he’s valuable in this sense. But the content is lacking or nonsensical and all of his rhetorical exercises are cheap manipulations of a sort.