As I watch the poor deluded greens and ecos talking about COP21, it is becoming more and more obvious to me that they are just being used by those attending cop21. Even at a very modest ~£30,000 salary for each attendee, the total cost of those employed is ~£1,000,0000,000/yr, when added to the cost of putting on COP which is estimated at another ~£1,000,000,000/yr this cost of this charade is far more than any commitments.
Green really does equal gullible!
The world has in effect created a monster consuming £1billion a year – and all it need do, to keep the pig swill coming, for those with their snouts in the trough attending year after year, is for them to proclaim how serious “the problem” is year after year, to tell the world how useful their contribution to solving “the problem” has been year after year, and how necessary it is for them to all attend next year. And every year it’s the same!
And so long as they don’t seriously suggest anything tangible or costly, global politicians appear more than happy to play along with the sham to get a few “green=gullible” votes.
But now it’s in no one’s interest to admit the truth. Those attending don’t want to give up these yearly free holidays. Politicians don’t want to admit that there is no real money on the table. The eco activists don’t want to hear any talk of failure – so who is going to tell them that these climate talks have been, and always will be, a total failure. Nothing will ever be achieved except a few non-binding commitments that are then broken or a few bungs of cash – which certainly were already earmarked in other budgets.
This cop-monster is nothing but “green-wash” – allowing politicians who are far from green to have a world stage every year in where they are ritually “green-washed” by the acclamation of the idiots greens too foolish and gullible to know they are just being used to kid a diminishing number of green=gullible voters or activists back home.
The emperor has no clothes……
There’s that old joke about how many psychiatrists does it take to change a lightbulb – only one but they have to want to change.
The same is true of these COPs – it only takes one person to stop these shams – but all of them have to each want to do it.
As the temperatures continue to drop and the snow packs get higher, sooner or later, all of the proponents will have to hide in shame, if, during a Maunder type of minimum, people turn to them and say, “Why did you promoted global warming when now we are unprepared for the cold?” I have a feeling that the sheep will turn against the “shepherds” who were really wolves in disguise.
I’m not a politician but rather an engineer. When I design and build something, I need to test it to ensure that is does what it is supposed to do.
I wonder if any of the proposed climate “solutions” come with mechanisms which can measure their effectiveness? I.e., what is the test that they are working? Common sense would say that if something isn’t working you stop doing it (or fix it). But that means you have to know if its working or not.
To propose a solution to a problem and not be able to tell later on if the solution is effective; well that’s insane.
They are in no hurry to hear the evidence showing no warming, in no hurry to admit it is true, then in no hurry whatsoever to admit they were wrong and certainly will not be spreading the news.
Climate “science” is “science” from which has been removed all necessity for testing or verification or any other form of tying down the hyperbole to what is actually happening or happened.