Kyoto Protocol: 32,000 Eminent Scientists say NO!

by Barry ORegan | May 18, 2008 at 05:37 am

1259 views | 13 Recommendations | 9 comments

Opinion
Barry Artiste, Now Public Contributor
Wow, 32,000 of the Worlds leading Scientists say NO!
Kyoto is a corrupt science these eminent Scientists state to the World.

Wonder where these Scientists were when Al Gore was accepting his Nobel Prize for his "Inconvienent Truth".

Certainly "Inconvienent" now that it shows BioFuels are now starving the Third World, in order to fill your Hybrid.

Guess Al Gore and his Scientist buddies forgot to mention that little inconvienence to the Third World's Hungry.

Though Climate Change, Global Warming are still serious issues, perhaps a revisiting of the Data should be audited to make certain we know what we speak of, before entering into the drastic side of solutions in the unknown.

Question: How many scientists does it take to establish that a consensus does not exist on global warming? The quest to establish that the science is not settled on climate change began before most people had even heard of global warming.

The year was 1992 and the United Nations was about to hold its Earth Summit in Rio. It was billed as -- and was -- the greatest environmental and political assemblage in human history. Delegations came from 178 nations -- virtually every nation in the world -- including 118 heads of state or government and 7,000 diplomatic bureaucrats. The world's environmental groups came too -- they sent some 30,000 representatives from every corner of the world to Rio. To report all this, 7,000 journalists converged on Rio to cover the event, and relay to the publics of the world that global warming and other environmental insults were threatening the planet with catastrophe.

In February of that year, in an attempt to head off the whirlwind that the conference would unleash, 47 scientists signed a "Statement by Atmospheric Scientists on Greenhouse Warming," decrying "the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuels and requires immediate action."

To a scientist in search of truth, 47 is an impressive number, especially if those 47 dissenters include many of the world's most eminent scientists. To the environmentalists, politicians, press at Rio, their own overwhelming numbers made the 47 seem irrelevant.

0 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend This comment thread is now closed

Albert Milliron

flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 07:30 on May 18th, 2008

Barry Artiste, I like this story. It's good stuff. This is like the USA putting Polr Bears on the endanged list when Polar Bear Numbers have increased significantly over the years. What you triple your numbers and your concidered endangered? Some of the coldest months in over 100 years and its global warming? I am a green conservative based on God not Gore. The bible tells man that he has been given dominion over the earth. This means rule and charge. It is our job to take care of what we have been given. I lived in Alaska where bears out numbered humans 3 to 1. Maybe Humans should be on the endanged list as well.

Barry ORegan

at 11:58 on May 18th, 2008

Thanks for the detailed comments Politisite and the Flag, in answer to your question, I surmise it is the numerous Green parties who are in danger of being relevant in their quest to garner funding from anyone. By constantly screaming the "Sky is Falling", "Greenies" much like "Internet Phishers" hope that they bag someone out "Hook ,Line and Sinker" with their "Fear Mongering", Grand Standing Politicians and Vacuous Celebs are the easiest dupes around, and "Special Interest Phishers" rely on them to provide the "Cause of the Day" to their worldwide fan base, it seems. Though I believe the earth is in trouble, perhaps "Sky is Falling "mentality will do more harm than good. Armchair academics on the Environment certainly need to get their "Collective Shit " together on this one.

Again, as always, thanks Politisite thanks for the insight.

eastvanray

flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 13:06 on May 18th, 2008

Barry Artiste, I like this story. It's good stuff.

Barry ORegan

at 15:36 on May 18th, 2008

Thanks EastRay

Heritage

at 03:42 on May 19th, 2008

Hi Barry,

Your story draws a direct connection with the Kyoto Protocol and biofuels.

I searched the entire KP and found no reference to biofuels.

Further, it appears the UN has been generally very cautious of biofuels largely due to food security issues.

2005 " “The production and use of biofuels need to be properly managed in order to provide energy services to the rural poor while improving food security and contributing to sustainable development,” UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) expert Gustavo Best said in Rome, where the paper was presented to the agency’s Committee on Agriculture."

2007 UN Expert Calls Biofuel 'Crime Against Humanity' ...called for a five-year moratorium on biofuel production to halt what he called a growing "catastrophe'' for the poor.

So your statement, "Guess Al Gore and his Scientist buddies forgot to mention that little inconvienence to the Third World's Hungry.", seems somewhat inaccurate.

Nations have developed their own biofuel policies for there own reasons. The USA for example "recently proposed to require the use of 35 billion gallons of alternative fuels by 2017". DaimlerChrysler chief executive Tom LaSorda said "We think this is the answer for America to lower our dependence on foreign oil,".

It is the biofuel policies of nations that are starving the Third World not the UN or the Kyoto Protocol.

Barry ORegan

at 07:58 on May 19th, 2008

Excellent Retort Heritage, truly you have done your work. Most Impressive!! Though you should know Kyoto and Biofuels go hand in hand as that was a given during the Kyoto stages. That is too bad you could not find a link, between AL Gore, Kyoto and BioFuels, as for AL Gores past position on World Hunger, granted he sees thing in a different light today. Anyhoo, thanks for the comments, here are the links you need.

In response to your above comments, in ending as they say in the Chess world. "Check and Mate"!

http://www.unctad.org/Templates/webflyer.asp?docid=9610&intItemID=3549&lang=1

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7136486.stm

http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2005/commentary_climate_4.pdf

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/05/big_announcemen.php

http://www.nyu.edu/community/gore.html

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=93315a55-e5c1-447f-9ddd-1638bb039235

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/the-biofuel-boom_b_95108.html

http://www.climatecrisiscoalition.org/CCC-Endorsement-9-18-06.html

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/85/i47/8547notw7.html

Heritage

at 23:46 on May 19th, 2008

"Though you should know Kyoto and Biofuels go hand in hand as that was a given during the Kyoto stages."

Your conclusion is not based on fact. Repeating the same misinformation does not make it true.

"That is too bad you could not find a link, between AL Gore, Kyoto and
BioFuels, as for AL Gores past position on World Hunger, granted he
sees thing in a different light today."

Al Gore is not the UN or even a representative of the US Government. His position may change, it doesn't matter. But the US Government's policy is currently, as you put it, "staving the third world".

Your "Check Mate" is at best lazy and at worst arrogant.

It is the biofuel policies of nations that are starving the Third World not the UN or the Kyoto Protocol.....or Al Gore.