Lima: You can fool some people all the time

The annual get together of the deluded at Lima has successfully kept the greenblobbyists occupied for another few weeks dangling carrots in front of them for the next talks in Paris:

“Right now we are facing the prospect of being no further forward than we were when we left last year’s meeting in Warsaw.”

“everything is still up in the air.”

“deadlock”

” weak-willed compromise.”

etc.

And yet again having achieved nothing but empty promises, they are again triumphing the achievement of having a plan to talk about what they plan to do at the next meeting, where they will plan to plan, to talk about the talks they plan…….
You can fool some people some of the time but there really are thousands of greens at Lima who can be fooled every time.

Addendum

Just been thinking and trying to understand how the politicians can keep stringing along these greenblobbyists year after year after year.
And I thought: “Of course, if a sceptic were at these talks, they would spot within a few hours what was going on as they would be focussed on measurable outcomes.”
… then it twigged!
Alarmists don’t care much for hard and fast facts. To them even when the temperature has not warmed, it is warming if there is a general “consensus” that it is warming. To them Arctic ice is melting because that’s the “consensus”. For them CO2 is a poison and not a plant food because that’s the “consensus”.
So, these alarmists must see a “success” at these talks, not in solid progress toward a measurable goal as we sceptics would see it, but instead on the degree of “consensus”.
So, this is how I think the greenblob has been strung along so long. Each year the politicians create a scenario of disagreement that needs to be overcome – and each year they go to these talks and at the last minute (for there is always a last minute deal), they come to a “consensus”. And because the greenblob see the world only in terms of whether there is consensus or not, and not tangible progress, the mere fact that they yet again come to a consensus to carry on to the next meeting is seen by the greenblob as a huge achievement.
But of course, the disagreement is as fake as the consensus – it’s just a way to suggest progerss when there is none.

This entry was posted in Kyoto. Bookmark the permalink.