Posted on 03/06/2015 1:30:27 AM PST by Boomer
A high UN official has admitted the real reason for the climate hysteria: to transform the world economy, redistributing income between from rich nations to poorer ones. Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), warned that the fight against climate change is a process and that the sought-after transformation of the world economy will not be decided at one conference or in one agreement.
(Excerpt) Read more at libertyunyielding.com ...
This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history.
This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution. That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 — you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation.
In 2011 speech in Madrid Figueres claimed that the recent unrest in Egypt was caused by rising food-prices which were in turn caused by global warming.
On a global level, increasingly unpredictable weather patterns will lead to falling agricultural production and higher food prices, leading to food insecurity. In Africa, crop yields could decline by as much as 50% by 2020. Recent experiences around the world clearly show how such situations can cause political instability and undermine the performance of already fragile states.
She added that if we took part of our defense spending and invested it in reducing carbon we could avoid the “horrors” associated with global warming.
Decisions on future defense spending are intricately linked to decisions on immediate climate investment through the different future risk assessments. What will be better?
Even under current trends, the rate of defence spending growth could account for a major part of the money needed to cut global emissions and to help the vulnerable, often in the most unstable areas of the world, to protect their societies from crumbling under climate pressures.
In other words, we should cut defense spending and give that money to other countries so they can solve their carbon problems. A similar point was made in 2010 by United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) official Ottmar Edenhofer:
But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore,with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.
It is a rare occurrence when the supporters of the climate change hypothesis tell the truth about why they are pushing their plan.
A rare occurrence indeed!
Sorry, but nothing new here...
Are you sure you are on the right forum?
bfl. We knew that...I’ll take defense. We can clean up later.
Heh, can you say nothing new here? Well, same old, same old is getting a bit boring don’t you think?
I’m sorry, are your one of those Save the World folks? If so, I apologize for destroying your world...
Can a libtard walk us through their thought process in how turning 3 billion poor people into middle class consumers will reduce consumption and pollution?
Probably not according to your ideas.
First of all, this is nothing more than a blog and should be posted in “bloggers”. Second, Deagle is right. There’s really nothing, to anyone who’s been on FR for a while, New in this. We’ve all known what she said is the real reason behind the climate change scare.
Oh geez, Climate scare, my gosh...
Hmm... I expected some different responses but nothing like this. I keep my ear to the ground and read a LOT and have never heard a global warming alarmist admit it was all about redistributing the money. It's on at least 3 different sites that I know of so it's not just one site.
Sure, we know it's about the money, but never have I heard them admit it. It's news to me and if it's news to me it probably is to others.
It’s more about turning a billion middle class people into poor people.
"Hmm... I expected some different responses but nothing like this. I keep my ear to the ground and read a LOT and have never heard a global warming alarmist admit it was all about redistributing the money. It's on at least 3 different sites that I know of so it's not just one site. Sure, we know it's about the money, but never have I heard them admit it. It's news to me and if it's news to me it probably is to others."
Just another Lenin clone.
Yawn.
I think it’s newsworthy that a UN dude is publicly admitting that it’s a lie.
But do not understand the hate on the thread - this exclamation is not from a FReeper, or Rush, or Levine saying what we all know to be true.
It’s the purveyor of the lie admitting it. IMO that’s newsworthy.
Deny the redistribution!!! Be a denier!!!
Not boring if it’s the truth.
OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a ball of fire that controls the climates of all its planets.
3. The earth is one of the sun’s planets.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?
I'm for Defense, as in national defense.
FTW, we can clean up after we kick their butts.
I'm pretty well on record around here for seeing the whole AGW bit for the hoax it is early on.
Anything done policy-wise after that exposure, is just tyranny or revenue generation or debilitating the first-world.
Considering I work in the oil industry, and we already saved the whales (the last one would have been burned in a lantern on Beacon Hill long ago if not for us and kerosene), I'm all for using our God-given resources and letting Him set the thermostat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.