the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Uh oh

Posted by Jeff Id on December 17, 2009

You never know what’ they’ll do.

BREAKING NEWS: Sydney Morning Herald reports 11th hour Copenhagen deal forged

I changed the post, Monkton will heal.

Noisy data,

Bad models,

Biased science,

A simple theory,

Socialist answer.


My only hope is that this turns out not to be ‘worse than we thought’ .


I don’t know if this is THE Jeff C or just another Jeff C, but this was left at WUWT.

Jeff C. (20:27:46) :

Folks, a little perspective here. Barry and Hill don’t have $100M or anything close to it. Neither one can commit us to this as treaties must be ratified by the Senate and the House must appropriate funds. It will never happen.

This is purely for the press to change the “Copenhagen Catastrophe” headlines.

29 Responses to “Uh oh”

  1. Karl Juve said

    I sincerely hope that Hillary Clinton will realize that she is no longer welcome in the United States of America. She can move to Denmark.

  2. Mark said

    Who’s surprised? Only cost Obama $100M to make a speech about how he saved the world from the impact on the climate of the Bush years.

    Wonder how many times he’ll say “I” ….

    We’ll still go through the whole thing again in Mexico City next year.

  3. […] It seems that there has been an eleventh-hour deal in Copenhagen. […]

  4. sierra117 said

    No need to panic. Its a bs deal that when analyzed will make our leaders look like idiots as opposed to heroes.

    If you accept the IPCC climate models (which I dont), the reductions in emissions noted in the “deal” will still mean the globe will heat by 3C.

    God help us and get out your scuba gear. lol.

  5. Raven said

    This is my nightmare situation: Obama promises cash he can’t deliver. Canada is forced to match to avoid being branded the bad guy. Obama reneges on his promise because it was not his to make. Canada still get stuck with shelling out the cash.

    The same story happened with Kyoto – Canada signed on immediately. The US senate deep sixed it. Canada could not do anything because its biggest customer/competitor was not doing anything but now Canada is bad guy cause it did not meet its Kyoto commitments.

  6. John Simpson said

    This is not a “deal” for a treaty, just a political statement to work towards resolving differences, with the objective of keeping temperature change to less than 2 degrees, presumably before Mexico. China already stated it was in favor of a face-saving political statement without any teeth.

  7. Raven said

    The latest rumours:

    It would kick off with $US10 billion ($A11.28 billion) a year from 2010 to 2012, climbing to $US50 billion ($A56.39 billion) annually by 2015 and $US100 billion ($A112.78 billion) by 2020.

    The text also proposes a range of innovative mechanisms for raising the money, ranging from a tax on air and sea transports fuels to a tax on financial transfers.

    This is bad. Really bad.

  8. Gardy LaRoche said

    This is what Monckton had predicted in an interview earlier this week:

  9. Sonicfrog said

    Of course, there is an out. China needs to be transparent in its carbon activities. Then again, it won’t matter. The way this administration is throwing around money, what is another 100 billion.

  10. Dan W said

    I am completely disgusted with this whole issue. This includes our politicians waving huge tax increases to further their political careers. I don’t think most of them truly believe in the man made global warming scenario but have been riding the political wave. They best be warned, the American people are starting to see the light and the wave of catastrophe is about to crash.

    In the end the science will prevail and the variations in climate will be better understood and the doomsayer Goreits will be exposed as the fanatics they are. I only hope the doomsayers don’t get more of my children’s and grandchildren’s borrowed tax dollars before the science is better understood.

    I am bothered that AGW is diverting attention to some real energy issues faced in the United States. That is our dependence on oil and our pumping of billions of dollars to the corrupt regimes selling it to us including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Russia, etc. If we are so damn concerned with CO2 then we could invest the $10Billion/year on Nuclear Power plants and remove the coal plants. Switch our vehicles to natural gas and implement zero sum loss conservation. Instead the Goreits want us to send our wealth to the developing nations to do what? Put up a wind tower or 2, install a couple of solar panels. That will effectively do nothing.

  11. Mark T said

    Note that if Obama is not capable of signing any form of treaty, Hillary is even less capable of doing so. Her “pledge” is legally meaningless. Politically speaking, I see it as yet another nail in the liberal coffin. Not that I’m happy about the flip-side (another shade of the same gray), either, just saying.


  12. Peter said

    I expected they will form some kind of agreement, no matter how watered done it will be. They had to do soemthing to save face. They couldn’t have gone to all that trouble and spent millions to end up with nothing.

  13. Todd said

    More liberal BS for us in America. This “treaty” won’t go anywhere because there’s no way the Senate will ratify anything. Most of whatever they’re coming up with is most likely more political posturing anyway, devoid of any real, or effective, action.

    Well, only 1 year to go until we have a Republican Senate and House. That will effectively shut down Obama for the rest of his term.

  14. hpx83 said

    If anyone is interested in the financial aspect of this treaty from the US point of view, don’t bother. The US doesn’t have more than a couple of years of debt-financing left – at best. This treaty will never have any financial impact on the Western World. It could however be the beginning of the end of western democracies. We were unfortunately warned – and not many listened. History repeats itself all too often. Let’s hope we don’t end up back in Weimar Germany….

    Allow me to recommend myself :

  15. Jeff Id said

    The irony of this whole situation is building. RC asking for code and now it appears now that China may be the country which saves the world from global communism. They don’t want any verification of their own CO2 production – which unless you make a hobby of being a rock, you already know they would cheat.

    There are, in fact, only a few countries which would abide by these idiotic policies. The rest will hide from them.

  16. Steve Fitzpatrick said

    #7 Raven,

    Don’t worry, POTUS Obama will so tick people off over the next 10 months he will lose ~4 Senate seats; and with only ~55 Dems, the Senate will never even vote on ratification. Tell your Canadian MP’s not to get suckered into a doomed deal.

  17. ed_finnerty said

    short memories people – this is all optics for the president – this is exactly what happened with Kyoto – the president and VP signed on with great fanfare – then the senate voted 97-0 against

  18. the latest?


  19. Dan Hughes said

    What happens when it is discovered, with 100% probability, that emissions are not on target?

    How can enforcement mechanisms be established that allow some World Organization to dictate energy conversion and consumption in individual countries?

  20. BillyRuffn said

    Definitely OT, but Bishop Hill has an interesting post directing readers to

    The guy needs some help with method — if what he’s done is right, it could be important news.

  21. cizi said

    Seems a UN climate fund of 30 billion dollars to help developing nations with environmental issues til 2016 has been agreed to. Does not include emission targets, but the goal of limiting global temperature increase to 2 degrees centigrade….All in all, no big deal, and the only big loser has been the credibility of science and MSM reportage.

  22. Greg F said

    It would kick off with $US10 billion ($A11.28 billion) a year from 2010 to 2012, climbing to $US50 billion ($A56.39 billion) annually by 2015 and $US100 billion ($A112.78 billion) by 2020.

    Looks like the same recipe used for those failed mortgages with no down payment.

  23. Jim said

    OT test Post of Mr. Pete’s CU add-on.
    Test Bold
    ds^2 = - \left(1- \frac{2M}{r} \right)dt^2 + \left(1- \frac{2M}{r} \right)^{-1}dr^2 + r^2 \Omega^2

  24. Another brutal parody from Iowahawk.

    I still prefer this one for supremely well-targeted lampoonery;


  25. Brian B said

    Here is a headline from today which seems a little more optimistic.
    Who’d a thunk we’d have to depend on Beijing and Delhi to save us from Washington?

  26. #25;
    Yes, and it refers to

    Includes this;
    “Obama said finance to developing nations is a must, and referred to America’s pledge to raise USD100 billion by 2020, but he asserted that it will be done “only if” it is part of a broader accord. “Mitigation, transparency, finance – it is a clear format,” he concluded.

  27. G Howe said

    What is amazing is SOS suggested a 100 BILLION annual fund yesterday. Then today, POTUS suggests it’s China’s fault for COP15 failure for not being transparent. Both gov’ts know any money from US towards the fund will be borrowed from China.

  28. Sonicfrog said

    Both gov’ts know any money from US towards the fund will be borrowed from China.

    That is a good point.

  29. Greg F said

    Both gov’ts know any money from US towards the fund will be borrowed from China.

    Never under estimate the power of the printing press … the US Treasury printing press.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: