Posted on 12/12/2009 2:11:55 AM PST by crosstimbers
The followng is posted in "Rumors" at the tickerforum:
DRAFT 271109 Decision 1/CP.15 (Decision 1/CMP.5 in separate document)
Adoption of The Copenhagen Agreement Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
The Conference of the Parties,
Pursuant to the Bali Road Map adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its thirteenth session,
Acknowledging and building on the work by the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action under the Convention and the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol,
Sharing a commitment to take immediate and enhanced national action under the Convention in pursuit of its ultimate objective, and in accordance with its principles and commitments including the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities,
Seeking at the same time to move ahead promptly to take action related to address climate change,
Believing it imperative that the Parties continue to work together constructively to strengthen the world’s ability to combat climate change,
Affirming the need to continue negotiations pursuant to decisions taken at COP13 and COP15, with a view to agreeing on a comprehensive legal framework under the Convention no later than COPXX
Decides to adopt this political agreement (hereinafter “the Copenhagen Agreement”), which will become effective immediately.
The Copenhagen Agreement
1. The Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (hereinafter “the Parties”) seek to further the implementation of the Convention in a manner that pursues its ultimate objective as stated in its Article 2, that recalls its provisions, and that is guided by the principles in Article 3.
(Excerpt) Read more at tickerforum.org ...
Obama dips in Copenhagen. I would like Obama to take a dip on national t.v. Sarah Palin dipped tobacco according to Going Rogue. Betch ya didn’t know that. did ya?
I would like to see Tina Fey parody Palin by stuffing her lip full of chew.
Very, very interesting. Thanks for posting.
UNaccountable bureaucrats and their machinations. ELIMINATE the UN.
I saw on Fox Business scoreboard show. They are not calling it treaty because it would take 67 votes.
The “greatest deliberative body in the world” /sarcasm should be calling for disbanding the IPCC and prosecuting these UNaccountable criminals.
Who will protect us from our protectors?
Here it is again: “agreement” not “treaty” so as to circumvent the 67 votes necessary to ratify a “treaty.”
"Hadley CRU has apparently been hacked –[epic fraud?]"
Click the picture:
And yes, it is a swindle- a fraud and a cheat and a scam-- a deliberately designed construct intended to con you out of things you hold dear-- money, and prosperity, and freedom... and a few other things, as well.
I wouln't get too excited about that. They can call it "peanut butter" if they like and it won't make any difference.
The President of the United States cannot commit to binding agreements without the approval of 2/3 of the Senate. He could pass a bill with the same language making it U.S. law and that would be subject to a majority vote in both houses of Congress plus the requirement, presumably, to overcome a Senate filibuster with at least a 60 vote majority. But that's not going to happen. The whole Copenhagen business is, as far as we are concerned, a giant publicity stunt. For the Europeans it's different. They may sign up and start burning their money. That's their problem.
Your "Sesame Street Education" is showing.
Two of the stupidest posts I've seen in a long time.
Is that the best you can do or did those awful meds snuffed out your pilot light?
They are going to shout down anything that might destroy that carbon maket...scheme...
Like the fact that CO2 really lags any warming that comes from Climate Change...however it happens.
David Evans has an article:
No smoking hot spot **********************EXCERPT*********************************
* David Evans
* From: The Australian
* July 18, 2008 12:00AM
I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.
FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I've been following the global warming debate closely for years.
When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.
The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.
But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts:
1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.
Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever.
If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. If we had found the greenhouse signature then I would be an alarmist again.
************************************
FR Thread I started:
The Missing Hotspot ---The ‘Hotspot’ is crucial to the climate debate.
fyi
I have a Question.
ALL gasses, etc etc etc.
It is this mixture that gives Earth its ability to grow and change. Supporting life,ALL life.
Now, how can we trust these unethical scientist to decide which mixture of these atmospheric cocktails is the RIGHT mixture.
Since Man has somehow in his/her ignorance managed to survive. What is it EXACTLY that the GW/CC Religionist want to save.
Nature finds a way. Man will as ususal adapt and survive.
SO AGAIN WHAT EXACTLY IS IT THAT THE ENVIROWHACKOS WANT TO SAVE THAT IS IN SUCH DANGER?
They will fabricate ANY story to achieve that end!
Thank you for the reassurance. I’ll be watching to see what happens. George Soros is heavily invested in both the outcome and in Obama and he damn well expects his investments to reap rich rewards.
Pesky facts. I enjoyed reading the linked article at the thread you linked. Thanks, Ernest.
Hey,...it’s been raining out here.
Here too, but you know I love rain! I hope you get more and don’t forget to alert me to all of your big storms!
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.
