Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

IPCC has no ideal what proportion of total carbon emissions are man-made, but insist that the only solution to global warming is to reduce those which are man-made


Climate politics heating up after the UN releases bombshell report on global warming 
Alex Ballingall  ~~  THE STAR  ~~  Oct. 9, 2018

On Sunday night, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) dropped a bombshell report. If humanity is to avoid the catastrophic extremes of global warming … then governments around the world need to ramp up their efforts to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions, the report concludes.

… the report’s 91 authors outline the path to limiting global warming by 1.5 degrees C above pre-industrial temperatures by 2100 … global greenhouse gases will need to fall by about 45 per cent below 2010 levels within the next 12 years, and then reach “net zero” by 2050, the report says.

This would require “rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society,” … as well as the advent of as yet-unproven means of sucking GHGs out of the atmosphere, the IPCC says.

It’s an astonishing prescription, to be sure — but, here in Canada, many expect the IPCC’s alarm to intensify what is already one of the most divisive political issues of our time: climate change and what to do about it.

To read more CLICK HERE:

This report has nothing to do with sober scientific study of global warning or climate change. It is all about politics and getting a few well-meaning nations to curtail economic growth and sharply reduce their standards of living to accommodate a hoax.

The only thing consistent about the IPCC is that since their initial warnings that the planet was in dire trouble, due to man-made carbon emissions, their voices have become more desperate and strident.

“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established by World Meteorological Organization and United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) in 1988 to assess scientific, technical, and socioeconomic information that is relevant in understanding human-induced climate change, its potential impacts, and options for mitigation and adaptation. 

The IPCC currently is organized into three Working Groups: Working Group I (WGI) addresses observed and projected changes in climate; Working Group II (WGII) addresses vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation related to climate change; and Working Group III (WGIII) addresses options for mitigation of climate change.”

Read that mandate very carefully.

The IPCC is not studying the effects of carbon emissions on global warming. It is focused on man-made carbon emissions only, and ignores all other sources of carbon emissions into the atmosphere … 


.... that would include volcanoes, rotting vegetation in forests and wet lands, forest fires, peat bog fires, melting tundra, burning animal waste for fuel, and rotting garbage.

Worse than that, they are focused on coal, gas, oil and all carbon-based energy fuels.

The IPCC has no ideal of what proportion of total carbon emissions are man-made emissions, but insist that the only solution is to reduce man-made carbon emissions. That is like rushing to an accident victim and spending all resources on stopping bleeding in a cut leg, while ignoring a punctured lung from a chest impact from the same accident.

Part of the IPCC deception is the statement that the report is the work of 91 scientists. Yes that is true, however it is not an entirely accurate statement.

The framework of the report was written by 16 people … Chapter 1 was written by 17 different people … Chapters 2 and 3 were written by another different group of 21 individuals … Chapter 4 was written by another different group of 21 ... and … Chapter 5 was written by yet another group of 16.

None of the authors was involved in the entire report, and only 21 were involved in more than one chapter. 

The Panel meets in Plenary Sessions at the level of government representatives for all member countries.  Currently, the IPCC has 195 members. The Panel meets approximately once a year at the plenary level. These Sessions are attended by hundreds of officials and experts from relevant ministries, agencies and research institutions from member countries and from observer organizations. Currently the IPCC has 152 observer organizations.  Major decisions are taken by the Panel during the Plenary Session.

For example;
1.           the election of the IPCC Chair, IPCC Bureau and the Task Force Bureau;
2.           the structure and mandate of IPCC Working Groups and Task Forces;
3.           IPCC Principles and Procedures;
4.           the work plan of the IPCC;
5.           the budget;
6.           the scope and outline of IPCC reports; and
7.           the approval, adoption and acceptance of reports.

It is not comforting to know that the IPCC is governed by 195 members nations, who are lobbied by 152 attending observer organizations, while less than three dozen nations are making some effort to reduce carbon emissions.

The IPCC is completely politicized and is overrun by non-democratic nations who have no interest in climate change, but have a strong interest in bringing down first world nations.


John Feldsted
Political Consultant & Strategist
Winnipeg, Manitoba

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

BC cannot regulate, redesign, and reinterpret its way to a stable forestry sector. Communities need clear rules, predictable timelines, and accountability for results.

Photo credit:  Atli Resources LP   BC’s Forestry Crisis Continues with Closure of Beaver Cove Chip Facility   As industry leaders, Indigenous partners, and contractors gather this week at the BC Natural Resources Forum in Prince George, the gap between government rhetoric and reality could not be clearer. Just hours after the Eby government once again touted reconciliation, certainty, and economic opportunity under DRIPA, Atli Chip Ltd, a company wholly owned by the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, announced it is managing the orderly closure of its Beaver Cove chip facility. The closure comes despite public tax dollars, repeated government announcements, and assurances that new policy frameworks would stabilize forestry employment and create long-term opportunity in rural and coastal British Columbia. “British Columbians are being told one story, while communities are living another,” said Ward Stamer, Critic for Forests. “This closure makes it clear that announcement...

Stamer: Hope for Forestry Completely Shattered After Another Provincial Review Driven by DRIPA

IMAGE CREDIT:  Provincial Forestry Advisory Council Conservative Critic for Forests Ward Stamer says the final report from the Provincial Forestry Advisory Council confirms the worst fears of forestry workers and communities; instead of addressing the real issues driving mill closures and job losses, the NDP has produced a report that ignores industry realities and doubles down on governance restructuring. Despite years of warnings from forestry workers, contractors, and industry organizations about permitting delays, regulatory costs, fibre access, and the failure of BC Timber Sales, the PFAC report offers no urgency, no timelines, and no concrete action to stop the ongoing decline of the sector. “ This report completely shatters any remaining hope that the government is serious about saving forestry ,” said Stamer.  “ We didn’t need another study to tell us what industry has been saying for years. While mills close and workers lose their livelihoods, the NDP is focused on re...

FORSETH – My question is, ‘How do we decide who is blue enough to be called a Conservative?’

How do we decide who’s blue enough to be a Conservative? AS OF TODAY (Friday January 30 th ), there are now eight individuals who have put their names forward to lead the Conservative Party of British Columbia. Having been involved with BC’s Conservatives since 2010, and having seen MANY ups and downs, having 8 people say “I want to lead the party” is to me, an incredible turn-around from the past. Sadly, however, it seems that our party cannot seem to shake what I, and others, call a purity test of ‘what is a Conservative’. And that seems to have already come to the forefront of the campaign by a couple of candidates. Let me just say as a Conservative Party of BC member, and as someone active in the party, that frustrates me to no end. Conservatives, more than any other political philosophy or belief, at least to me, seems to have the widest and broadest spectrum of ideals.   For the most part, they are anchored by these central thoughts --- smaller and less intru...

Labels

Show more