"Before facing major surgery wouldn't you want a second opinion?" Craig Idso and S. Fred Singer from Climate Change Reconsidered
Obama's Attendance at the UN Climate Change Conference
Just days after the November, 2009 exposure of emails evidencing cooking the books of climate change research, President Obama announced his participation in the upcoming UN's Climate Change Conference that takes place from December 7-18, 2009 in Copenhagen. He will stop there on December 9, 2009 for a day on his way to accept his Nobel Prize. Largely ignored or dismissed as unimportant by the mainstream media, the public airing of emails provided the smoking gun about the Global Warming hoax, now named Climate Change since there is no proof of any warming over the past decade. Since facts frequently are irrelevant to political agendas, at the Copenhagen conference President Obama will commit the US to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 17% by 2020 with enormous economic consequences.
According to the UN's COP15 (fifteenth Conference of the Parties) website, the Copenhagen Airport is ready to handle the 140 or so jet aircraft bringing VIP's in to attend the conference. The estimated carbon footprint of 140 jet flights to gather these heads of state and other luminaries in Copenhagen is 300 tons of CO2.
The Motive and Background History Behind the UN's Climate Change Agenda
The motive for so many developing and less developed countries to be willing to sign the Copenhagen Treaty is that it is the vehicle for a massive transfer of wealth from the developed countries like the USA and other Western nations to them. In fact, the agreements are purposely disproportionate to accomplish this transfer. The Copenhagen treaty was produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) whose goal, according to their web site is "to use scientific literature to evaluate the extent and understanding of climate changes, as well as the potential to adapt to or counteract climate changes". The Copenhagen Treaty will supersede the Kyoto Protocol established in 1997 that both Presidents Clinton and Bush rejected. The IPCC was established in 1988 by UNEP, the United Nations Environment Program and World Meteorological Organization (WMO). According to the UN website "there are over 1200 independent scientific authors and 2500 reviewers who have taken part in the preparation of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report published in 2007." The IPPC's key authors and personnel have all been appointed by member governments with their research supported by government contract and so from its very beginning, a political rather than scientific entity. The IPPC has produced four assessment reports and Summaries for Policy Makers for each of the assessment reports.
The First Assessment Report in 1990 led to the adoption of the Global Climate Treaty in Rio de Janiero in 1992, but not without significant criticism. The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) refutes the conclusions reached by the IPCC about global warming and climate change and underscores their misuse of the report to advance the global political agenda of the IPCC. SEPP was founded in 1990 by atmospheric physicist S. Fred Singer as a non-profit, 501(c)3 educational group. Its original mission was to "clarify the diverse problems facing the planet and, where necessary, arrive at effective, cost-conscious solutions."
After the Second Assessment Report, Climate Change 1995, completed in 1995 and published in 1996, Dr. Fredrick Seitz, Chairman of the Board of SEPP, reported in an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal that substantial changes had been made in the document
after scientists had agreed on the content of the paper. In essence the skepticism surfaced by fellow scientists had been scrubbed from the document! In the WSJ piece Dr. Seitz cited the following statements as having been removed from the IPCC document:
"None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed [climate] changes to the specific cause of increases in greenhouse gases."
"No study to date has positively attributed all or part [of the climate change observed to date] to anthropogenic [man-made] causes."
"Any claims of positive detection of significant climate change are likely to remain controversial until uncertainties in the total natural variability of the climate system are reduced."
This action was the catalyst behind the 1996 publication of the Leipzig Declaration, signed by 100 climate scientists. The Leipzig Declaration was produced prior to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and contained the following admonition: "However, based on all the evidence available to us, we cannot subscribe to the politically inspired world view that envisages climate catastrophes and calls for hasty actions. For this reason, we consider the drastic emission control policies likely to be endorsed by the Kyoto conference -- lacking credible support from the underlying science -- to be ill-advised and premature." The Kyoto Protocol was subsequently adopted in December 1997 but voted down in the US Senate 95-0 and President Clinton refused to sign it.
The third IPCC assessment report and SPM was reputed to contain serious errors leading to faulty conclusions and refuted by SEPP in their paper titled "The Kyoto Protocol is not Backed by Science" in which Professor S. Fred Singer of the University of Virginia states that "action to "combat" global warming is hard to justify when the preponderance of data show no warming that can be assigned to human causes, when economists conclude that higher CO
2 levels and a warmer climate would be beneficial rather than harmful, and when proposed schemes to control greenhouse-gas emissions are largely ineffective. Considering the high cost of such controls and their political nature, the Kyoto Protocol, as President George Bush has stated, is "fatally flawed" and should be abandoned. "
The most recent IPCC fourth assessment report was published in 2007 and then later revised to conform to the Summary for Policy Makers. It was reported that with the highly touted scientific peer-review process the authors rejected over half of the comments of the reviewers in the critical chapter attributing global warming to human activities.
Climate Change Reconsidered & 31,478 Scientist's Petition
After these flawed and error-prone reports, SEPP formed the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change and organized a symposium in Vienna in April 2007. The result was Climate Change Reconsidered, a 855 page report produced without government sanction and with donated time and effort. Climate Change Reconsidered refutes and debunks the science distorted and misreported for the purpose of advancing the global agenda of wealth transfer from the US and other developed countries to the rest of the world. In addition it contains the following petition that has been signed by the 31,478 American scientists and Ph.D.'s listed in the report:
"We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997 and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
Based on observations of glacial ice melting and sea ice area, sea level rise and etc. the authors note that there is no evidence of trends that can be attributed to human causes. The conclusions reached are that variations in solar activity, not greenhouse gases are the true driver of climate change.
Agreeing to any part of the Copenhagen Treaty, with its punitive provisions, will have far reaching negative consequences to the US economy. Like Cap and Trade, for most Americans, it will amount to another tax burden.
Links
[url=http://en.cop15.dk/frontpage]http://en.cop15.dk/frontpage[/url]
[url=http://www.nature.org/initiatives/climatechange/calculator/?gclid=CLDX3putq54CFSZdagodrUrblw]http://www.nature.org/initiatives/climatechange/calculator/?gclid=CLDX3putq54CFSZdagodrUrblw[/url]
[url=http://www.sepp.org/]http://www.sepp.org/[/url]
[url=http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aDgL9I_.sxug]http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aDgL9I_.sxug[/url]
[url=http://www.sepp.org/Archive/controv/ipcccont/Item05.htm]http://www.sepp.org/Archive/controv/ipcccont/Item05.htm[/url]
[url=http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/monckton_2009.pdf]http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/monckton_2009.pdf[/url] -
Dennis Jones resides in Orange County, California with his wife and two children and has made his living as Chief Financial Officer in the Restaurant Industry for the past 30 years. He received his MBA from Long Beach State University and has a BS degree in Finance from the same institution. 
