COP29: ‘Animal Farm’ Moment

Climate scientist/activist Joyce Kimutai gave a frank assessment of the just completed two-week UN climate conference of parties (COP 29) on social media. Hers is a refreshing take in comparison to the whining of the developing (statist) countries seeking handouts and the glass-one-eighth-full newspaper reporting from the mainstream media. She began:

Now, as I recover from the exhaustion of the past weeks, I find myself sitting on my couch, sipping sweet Kenyan tea, while reflecting on the outcomes of COP29.

As the climate crisis deepens, multilateralism is weakening, leaving vulnerable communities at the center of geopolitical tensions. The $300 billion commitment is both insignificant and shameful in the grand scheme of addressing the climate emergency.

I participated in numerous negotiation and coordination sessions, as well as side events. One side event focused on the need to improve scenarios to better represent an equitable world.

Climategate Turns 15!

“I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she thinks she’s doing, but it’s not helping the cause, or her professional credibility.” (- Michael Mann, below)

The futile, wasteful anti-CO2 crusade is in its 37th year, dating from the hot, dry summer of 1988 when NASA scientist James Hansen sounded the alarm before U.S. lawmakers, led by Al Gore.

Last week, the United Nations Conference of Parties (COP) ended with acrimony over an unenforceable agreement pledging to transfer wealth to developing (Statist) countries for “clean” energy development.

CO2 emissions cuts? With almost all major emitters well beyond the targets set in the 2015 Paris Accord, the (also) unenforceable agreement is losing more and more every day as self-interest swamps aspirations. The recipient welfare states described COP29 as “chaotic,” “complete failure,” “optical illusion,” “stage managed,” and “paltry.”…

Climate Debate on Social Media: Are the ‘Skeptics’ Winning?

Ed. Note: The links below have been blocked against Bradley. They might work for you. If so, feel free to bring up this debate and post with the principals.

The post below by climate alarmist/activist Kasper Benjamin Reimer Bjørkskov (“Consultant activist – Head of innovation”) began the debate.

I responded: “Ad hominem? Let’s debate. I’ve worked with dozens of mainstream scientists over the decades to reach my conclusions, which can be found in this 2003 primer for the IEA of London.”

Matthew Joseph.K of India demurred against the censorship approach:

Why should we block him? Debate him with facts. That would expose him.

Or ignore him. Blocking him is a sign of weakness unless he poses a security issue for you. It will just add fuel to his cause.

Al Gore: Climate Barking at COP29

Alberta: CO2 is Positive!

Government-enabled Nuclear: Trump Demures

Trump 45 vs. Green New Deal (Trump 47 will be better)

The Climate Road to Serfdom in One Graph

President-Elect Trump’s Climate/Energy Policy: 100-Day Action Plan a Good Start

Fossil Fuel Political Backfire (AEI’s Teixeira explains)