Show Me the Money

Exclusive Report:

Show Me the Money

COP19
by Pat Carlson
National Environmental Chairman

Further Reading: United Nations / Global Warming

November 13, 2013

Everybody talks about the weather but nobody does anything about it. That is until the United Nations started talking about it. Their talks started with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. They have since convinced the world they cannot only predict the weather but can control it. These talks continue in Warsaw, Poland for the next two weeks, November 11-22, 2013, as the Conference of the Parties COP19 meet with country delegates, non-government organizations (NGOs), and media to discuss not the weather but the climate. The climate is what you expect. The weather is what you get and the UN is certainly getting something much different than what they predicted.

The UN persists in its quest to convince the world that human activity is causing global warming and global warming will lead to the devastation of the earth. The earth has not warmed since 1998 but the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) continues to issue reports claiming global warming not only exists but is getting worse.

Their claims are based on pseudo science and totally unreliable computer models used to predict future weather patterns. The latest report issued just before COP19 claims that projected warming will likely raise temperatures 0.5 to 8.6 degrees Fahrenheit by the late 21st century if carbon emissions are not reduced. The report responds to the lack of warming since 1998 as probably linked to natural swings in the climate. In other words, they can’t explain why their computer models have been so wrong.

The talks are about blame. To blame is to make someone responsible for the supposed wrongdoing and if someone has done wrong they should pay a penalty. The UN has made the case that developed nations such as the U.S. are to blame because we’ve enjoyed the fruits of the industrial revolution in our lifestyles. These lifestyles have polluted a finite atmosphere causing global warming. Having used up this finite atmosphere cheats developing nations from achieving similar lifestyles. This is referred to as “historical responsibility.” The penalty to be paid by developed nations, according to the UN, is reparations (money) and technology.

Since global warming isn’t really occurring now, the IPCC claims it’s the cause of all the extreme weather patterns that have occurred in the past few years. The most recent tragic events of typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines have given the perfect fuel for developing nations at COP19. The tragedy the Philippine people have suffered is incomprehensible to most of us, but to think the human activity of developed nations caused the event should be beyond the realm of any intelligent person’s thinking. Not so at COP19.

The first day of the conference, the Climate Change Commissioner from the Philippines, Naderev Sano, gave a speech in the main plenary blaming this on developed nations. He began crying and said he would, in solidarity with his people, voluntarily fast until the COP reaches a meaningful outcome and delivers on climate action. Translated this means “Let me see the money.”

In a press conference, another Philippine delegate made similar remarks, saying the tragedy was “an abomination which is not our doing” and “we have to get support from someone else’s pocket.” Yet nobody mentioned the U.S. Marines went in immediately to the worst hit areas bringing water, generators and other critical supplies. The U.S. military also offered aircraft and manpower for search and rescue. Private groups from the U.S. have sent in medicines, food, blankets, etc. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) sent 55 metric tons of food. So how much is enough?

This redistribution of wealth for the perceived “moral and ethical injustice” of climate change was first tried by the UN through Clean Development Mechanisms (CDMs). This was a way to get money and technology to developing nations through investments and loans for new infrastructure or just anything green. But as with most UN programs there was abuse. Most investments and loans went to China, India and Brazil and almost nothing went to the very small countries.

When CDMs didn’t work, the Green Climate Fund (GCF) was introduced at COP15 in Copenhagen in 2009. It was proposed $30 billion be given by developed countries over three years until 2012 as fast-start funding. Then additionally, none other than Hillary Clinton proposed that developed countries collectively pledge $100 billion per year until 2020. This sounded good but the pledges have been far short of anything close to $100 billion. The U.S. claims to have given $32 billion from 2010-2012 and it is calculated, according to a U.S. delegate, the 2013 contribution will be $2.7 billion.

If the UN bureaucrats and the developing countries can’t get concrete funding for the GCF at COP19, then the next trick up their sleeves is something called a “loss and damage” mechanism. Loss and damage are insurance terms. Legally loss means “the value placed on injury or damages due to an accident caused by another’s negligence, a breach of contract or other wrongdoing.” Damage can mean “injury or harm impairing the function or condition of a person or thing.” Damages can also be ordered to be paid as compensation for injury or loss.

Defining and developing a loss and damage mechanism at COP19 is a top priority. Whatever form this mechanism takes, it can only be seen as having one function and that is developed countries being responsible for insuring developing countries against natural disasters. Again, the typhoon tragedy in the Philippines happened at an opportune time for COP19. This will be used as a driving force to get loss and damage pushed through.

The conference has only just begun. Two more weeks to see how much further the enviro-radicals can push their agenda.