More on the dying hoax in the WSJ.
Consider the case of global warming, another system of doomsaying prophecy and faith in things unseen.
As with religion, it is presided over by a caste of spectacularly unattractive people pretending to an obscure form of knowledge that promises to make the seas retreat and the winds abate. As with religion, it comes with an elaborate list of virtues, vices and indulgences. As with religion, its claims are often non-falsifiable, hence the convenience of the term "climate change" when thermometers don't oblige the expected trend lines. As with religion, it is harsh toward skeptics, heretics and other "deniers." And as with religion, it is susceptible to the earthly temptations of money, power, politics, arrogance and deceit.
This week, the conclave of global warming's cardinals are meeting in Durban, South Africa, for their 17th conference in as many years. The idea is to come up with a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, which is set to expire next year, and to require rich countries to pony up $100 billion a year to help poor countries cope with the alleged effects of climate change. This is said to be essential because in 2017 global warming becomes "catastrophic and irreversible," according to a recent report by the International Energy Agency.
Yet a funny thing happened on the way to the climate apocalypse. Namely, the financial apocalypse.
The U.S., Russia, Japan, Canada and the EU have all but confirmed they won't be signing on to a new Kyoto. The Chinese and Indians won't make a move unless the West does. The notion that rich (or formerly rich) countries are going to ship $100 billion every year to the Micronesias of the world is risible, especially after they've spent it all on Greece.
And this excellent piece in by Terence Corcoran.
Peter Kent has it right on carbon deal
On the eve of the Dustbin in Durban, an apt nickname for the doomed UN Framework climate talks that opened Monday in South Africa, it looks like the Kyoto Protocol will not go gently into the night, at least not for Canada.
When Environment Minister Peter Kent stated the obvious — which is that the global protocol to control carbon emissions was “in the past” as far as Canada is concerned — he was denounced on all fronts. The Green Party, the Liberal party, the Pembina Party, the Greenpeace Party and other standard-bearers of the 1997 status quo on climate policy were instantly aflame with indignation that Mr. Kent should dare to utter such blasphemy.
“Shameful” and “sabotage,” said Elizabeth May, the Green leader. Liberal environment critic Kristy Duncan called Mr. Kent’s position “cowardly,” and accused Canada of negotiating in bad faith. Greenpeace described Canada’s failure to live up to its Kyoto commitment a failure of “epic proportions.”
As Mr. Kent tried to make clear to reporters Monday: Rumours that the Kyoto Protocol is still alive are greatly exaggerated. Whether the Harper Conservatives have actually decided to formally pull out of Kyoto in December — as reported — Mr. Kent would not confirm. It is clear, however, that Canada is out of Kyoto, the great green monster former prime minister Jean Chrétien agreed to in Japan in 1997, committing to rip apart the economy in an attempt to get national carbon emissions down to 6% below 1990 levels.
And in the NP.
This is not news. Even it's high priests admit it. The usual suspects that profit from the hoax are screaming but who even cares any more.