the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

AP TX

Posted by Jeff Id on August 1, 2010

You know, the AP might have to sue me for this, but it’s their own fault for writing this leftist drivel.  The article, as written is below in black with appropriate translation in red.

By ARTHUR MAX (AP) – 13 hours ago

AMSTERDAM — The failure of a climate bill in the U.S. Senate is likely to weigh heavily on international negotiations that begin Monday on a new agreement to control global warming.

Blame the US for not complying with global leftist opinion.

The decision to strike the bill from the Senate’s immediate agenda has deepened the distrust among poor countries about the intentions of United States and other industrial countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions that power their wealthy economies but risk causing the Earth to dangerously overheat, say climate activists.

Poor communist and muslim countries don’t trust capitalist countries to turn over their cash voluntarily. Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt disagree with the reticence.

A split between rich and poor nations has characterized the talks since they began 2 1/2 years ago, but it widened after the disappointment of the Copenhagen climate summit last December that fell short of any binding agreement and produced only a brief document of political intentions.

The as defined payers and receivers (losers/winners)have discovered they are on opposite sides of how much should be paid.

The withdrawal of the bill to cap U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide, the most prominent gas blamed for global warming, “plays into the same old fault lines,” said Kelly Dent, of Oxfam International. It has let down developing countries that had looked to President Barack Obama’s administration to seize the leadership in climate negotiations, she said Sunday from Bonn, Germany.

Limitation of the US economy to increase the ability of non-capitalist non-free peoples to compete has not gone forward as rapidly as hoped.

Delegations from most of the 194 participating nations begin a five-day negotiating session in Bonn on Monday that is one of the last meetings before another decisive conference convenes at the end of the year in Cancun, Mexico. One more weeklong round of talks is scheduled for October in China.

The two keys to any agreement are commitments by rich countries to cut emissions and their pledges to fund poor countries’ actions to adapt to climate changes affecting agriculture and the frequency of extreme weather events like floods and drought.

Communists, socialists, dictators and Muslims demand that capitalists enable fair competition with less productive government systems by limiting industry and sending profits directly to the equally wonderful yet inexplicably poor governments.

So far, Washington has not backed away from its promise at Copenhagen to reduce emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels over the next 10 years. But even that pledge, made more doubtful now by legislative inertia, has been roundly criticized as inadequate.

We cannot detect the difference in output of CO2 but we hope that the capitalists will suicide soon.

Christiana Figueres, presiding over the talks for the first time since becoming executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change a month ago, says the industrial countries must lift their emissions reduction pledges if they hope to limit global warming to manageable levels this century.

More limitation of successful countries is the answer to all our woes.

Pledges given so far amount to reductions of 12 to 19 percent below 1990 levels, she told reporters last week. U.N. scientists have said the rich countries must slash emissions by 25 to 40 percent by 2020. Because carbon dioxide accumulates in the atmosphere, scientists say it is crucial to act quickly to reach a peak in global emissions.

Leftist scientists funded by government agree that we need to surrender to government control as soon as possible.

The U.N. negotiations aim to reach a deal to succeed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which called on a list of industrial countries to cut emissions by a total 5 percent by 2012 as measured against 1990.

The United States rejected Kyoto, partly because it made no demands on rapidly developing countries like China, which now produces more much heat-trapping gases than any other country.

How do you translate that nonsense.

Developing countries now say they are willing to take steps to control emissions, but that they must be given space to build their economies. Although China is the largest carbon polluter and India is rapidly catching up, both countries lag far behind the industrial countries in emissions per person and still have huge populations mired in poverty.

China and India should be allowed to pollute equally because their governments are equal or better and per-capita they have less pollution.

Shifting to a lower gear, Figueres says it would be a mistake to seek an overarching package deal in Cancun, which she said would “ignore the need to continue innovating” to combat global warming.

Let’s not be too rigid, let’s just get the money.

Instead, delegates should focus on a few essentials they can build on later. One is a practical plan for raising and distributing $30 billion over the next three years to poor countries, as pledged at Copenhagen, she said.

Just a measly 30 billion should keep people quiet and then our toe will be in the door.

After a meeting last week in Rio de Janeiro, the environment ministers of Brazil, China, India and South Africa — an increasingly important negotiating bloc known as the BASIC countries — said “fast-start finance will be the key for an effective result” in Cancun.

If we get the toe in the door, we can work on the big stuff later.

Financing must be new, rather than repackaged development aid, and should be given as grants, the four countries said in a joint statement.

Don’t give us the same money twice, we need new money and not as loans which need to be repaid, we need grants.

Can you see how easy it is to read the news these days?  You just need to use your bullshit filter — for every single sentence.  It’s no wonder they can’t sell this crap, but the governments of the world are quite happy with the status quo.  Enough so that they want to fund the dying papers.

What is wrong with people who believe in this garbage reporting.


24 Responses to “AP TX”

  1. Brian H said

    BS baffles brains and bilks billfolds.

  2. DBD said

    Amen!

  3. Geoff Sherrington said

    Jeff, you have a probem. You are able to think logically. You should donate some of that ability to others less fortunate.

  4. kim said

    Eighteen months before Copenhagen, I read a report from a Houston energy journal, and with the knowledge from that I was able to predict that the Chinese and the Indians would attempt a huge shakedown of the developed West over the carbon guilt of the West’s elites. I expected Copenhagen to fail. What I didn’t predict was that the Chinese would hide their chagrin over the failed shakedown by expressing outrage over the attempted backroom deal among the West’s elites promulgated by none other than President Obama.

    The root cause is the delusion of the West’s elite about AGW and carbon guilt. The Indians and the Chinese have no intention of grinding their poor further bacause the leaders of the West have become deluded. Note, too, that the Chinese are busily tracking down and claiming every spare hydrocarbon bond on earth.
    =============

  5. boballab said

    Jeff I got the Translation for this part:

    The U.N. negotiations aim to reach a deal to succeed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which called on a list of industrial countries to cut emissions by a total 5 percent by 2012 as measured against 1990.

    The United States rejected Kyoto, partly because it made no demands on rapidly developing countries like China, which now produces more much heat-trapping gases than any other country.

    The US refused Kyoto because the Chinese wouldn’t suicide along with them, so the UN has to try to talk the US into jumping off the cliff before time runs out.

  6. M. Simon said

    Try filtering this bulls**t:

    http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2010/08/less-power-more-control.html

    Francois Broquin, a co-author of reports on coal by Bernstein Research, said the combined rules could push as much as 20 percent of U.S. coal-fired electric generation capacity to retire by 2015. “Obviously that will have an impact,” he said.

    Fortunately most of the plants being retired will be on the East Coast. I wonder what they will do when the Magic no longer comes out of the walls?

  7. M. Simon said

    And let me add that I live about 10 or 15 miles from the Byron Nuke Plant on the Rock River. And rates are somewhat capped in Illinois. For now.

    When the East Coast goes dark I’m going to LMAO (well other than the loss of customers).

  8. Sam said

    Leftist scientists funded by government agree that we need to surrender to government control as soon as possible.

    Finally, someone has succinctly described what ‘consensus’ means! Thank you Jeff.

  9. GregO said

    Jeff,

    Spot on and thanks.

    When will media and governments recognize that man-made CO2 is not causing a crisis-level climate catastrophe? How many more years have to go by without horrific climate-change before government and media get to work on real problems? What is the real motivation behind constantly flogging this dead-horse of impending climate catastrophe?

    Perhaps it is some weird combination of subconscious self-hatred and delusion. Or maybe it is just a naked power/money grab by the lefties. That is a scary thought – and I am not prone to any kind of conspiracy theories – but it could also be a loosely knit type of conspiracy where various political and financial players are anxiously positioning themselves to profit from the perceived crises and if that is what is going on … wow, talk about slimy and in the case of government officials dereliction of duty.

    And all the while MSM is uncritically sucking up every AGW morsel – political and technical while ignoring facts and consequences. Amazing to behold.

  10. Mark F said

    A good portion of a “generation” of true-believers’ kids have now grown up sharing their parents’ belief in the hockeystick. Even with the best “for dummies” expose and significant outlays of cash, it may take a decade or more to reform public opinion. Scary. Lobby your politicians.

  11. Steve Fitzpatrick said

    Jeff,

    Nice rant!😉

    But don’t be too upset. Power will shift considerably in the Senate in November, and it will then become almost impossible to get even a the Senate to agree to formal treaty obligations on CO2 reductions. Should control of either house change in November, EPA will be forced (one way or another) to reverse their “endangerment” finding, and then the Obama administration will have no means by which to implement carbon restrictions without an explicit law being passed…. and that is not going to happen. If formal control of both houses remains with the Democrats, then EPA will continue to promulgate rules to force CO2 emission reductions… at least until November 2012. It will ultimately be a political decision, just as it should be.

    So if you want to stop the eco-madness, contribute to candidates that could switch control of one of the houses of Congress.

  12. Steve Fitzpatrick said

    Jeff,

    Nice rant.😉

    But don’t be too upset. Power will shift considerably in both the House and the Senate in November, and it will then become almost impossible to get even 50 votes in the Senate for formal treaty obligations on CO2 reductions; 60 votes will be completely impossible.

    Should control of either house change to the Republicans in November, EPA will be forced (via budgetary controls, eg. no funding) to effectively reverse their “endangerment” finding, and then the Obama administration will have no means by which to implement CO2 restrictions without an explicit law being passed. And an explicit law is clearly not going to pass. If formal control of both houses remains with the Democrats, then EPA will continue to promulgate “air pollution” rules to force CO2 emission reductions… at least until November 2012. In the end, reducing or not reducing CO2 emissions will be a political decision, just as it should be (Micheal Tobis be damned).

    So if you want to stop the eco-madness promptly, contribute to candidates that could help switch control of one of the houses of Congress!

  13. Steve Fitzpatrick said

    Sorry about the double post…I apparently hit the wrong Key and sent an incomplete comment.

  14. Andrew said

    Every time I read an AP story I smell bacon. Then I realize the sizzling is my brain catching fire.

    Definitely excruciatingly stupid.

  15. TGSG said

    #9 “Or maybe it is just a naked power/money grab by the lefties”

    BINGO: it’s all about the money, always has been and always will be.

  16. oMan said

    Jeff: I concur with Geoff Sherrington @3. You should donate some of your surplus logic to the dummies in the media. Although there are so many of them that on a per-capita basis the donation will do them no discernible good.

    Thanks, excellent interpretation of the in(s)anity.

  17. greg2213 said

    And people wonder why the MSM credibility anomaly has sunk well into the negatives, with no bottom in sight. It won’t be long before the AP is nationalized.

  18. David Jay said

    We have a winner!

    Greg for finding a way to include “anomaly” in the discussion of the media.

    I prefer actual temperatures to anomalies. Is there a truth equivalent to ZERO KELVIN?

  19. Brian H said

    I’ve always been suspicious of the choice of that word to describe variations from an arbitrarily chosen mean or trend line. It carries connotations of weirdness, abnormality, deviance, unexpectedness. At the very least, it suggests there exists a normal (= accepted and acceptable) pattern, from which this is an unexpected exception.

    It “begs the question”, since the nature of “normal” is exactly what remains to be determined. E.g.: if a 16-yr. old has a growth spurt of 1″, he is not having a “height anomaly”!

  20. Brian H said

    Even if it’s 4″! 😉

  21. Graeme said

    Jeff noted…

    The U.N. negotiations aim to reach a deal to succeed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which called on a list of industrial countries to cut emissions by a total 5 percent by 2012 as measured against 1990.

    The United States rejected Kyoto, partly because it made no demands on rapidly developing countries like China, which now produces more much heat-trapping gases than any other country.

    How do you translate that nonsense.

    How about…

    “Communists, socialists, dictators and Muslims note that China does not have a culture of self hating, self flagellating, guilt that can be leveraged to induce a suicidal redistribution of wealth, and also note that the US had better hurry up before the wealth of the US is evaporated by current Federal government policies…”

  22. Graeme said

    Jeff noted…

    Developing countries now say they are willing to take steps to control emissions, but that they must be given space to build their economies. Although China is the largest carbon polluter and India is rapidly catching up, both countries lag far behind the industrial countries in emissions per person and still have huge populations mired in poverty.

    China and India should be allowed to pollute equally because their governments are equal or better and per-capita they have less pollution.

    Hmmmm….

    All people are allowed to pollute equally – some people’s pollution is more equal than others…

  23. Duster said

    Kipling put it thus:

    “Whether the people be lead by the Lord, or lured by the loudest throat
    Whether it be swifter to die by the sword, or cheaper to die by vote,
    These are matters we have dealt with once, they will not rise from their grave,
    Holy people however it runs, endeth in wholly slave.”

    Unfortunately he wrote that for an optimistic science fiction story. In fact these matters seem more durable than cockroaches.

  24. Jeff Id said

    #23 Amen.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: