We might be in for more economic troubles ahead. Apparently the Paris Climate talks are going to result in some commitments by major-player countries. And the thinly veiled threats are already starting to be heard.
Those who refuse to cave and those who agree now, but don’t follow through will be chastised, harassed, labeled, and boycotted by the never-ending alarmist voices spurred by the billion-dollar entrepreneurs of alternative energy and glory-seeking world-order politicians.
The current US government is a leader in the charge to reduce CO2 emissions by curtailing fossil fuel consumption and will remain so, as long as the likes of Obama are at the helm. The buffoons vying for the leadership of the US Republican party will likely assure us that the charade will continue ad nauseam, because the US electorate would have to be brain-dead to endorse them to take the reins. It seems to be a no-win situation.
I confidently predict that atmospheric levels of CO2 will continue to rise for the next decade, two decades, and probably for several more decades, and the temperature of the earth will continue to do what it will do … stay the same, go up, go down, in spite of what levels of CO2 that are attained in our atmosphere.
However, the economic goods and services provided by the likes of China, India, Poland, and any other heretic-declared nations (Canada?) will be boycotted, causing the global economy to sputter, sputter, sputter. Only then, and after data overwhelmingly proves the falsehood of AGW model predictions to even the most complacent of us, might the masses wake up and finally figure out that increasing atmospheric CO2 has little to do with global temperatures.
Caveat … the levels of atmospheric CO2 will actually start going down when the oceans of the earth inevitably start to cool again, since the cooler water will naturally start absorbing more CO2 and outgassing less of it. That’s a real law of real science.
It is such a sad state of affairs when main stream media outlets (like Canada’s CBC) no longer report news that is contrary to their adopted ideology, or they shape the news in a way to ensure the propagation of that ideology.
As a publicly-funded broadcaster, the CBC should be ashamed of itself.
They have become just as opined and narrow-minded as their counterpart blowhards south of the border, but at least these blowhards have an excuse. They are privately owned and these owners are far less interested in reporting the news than they are in selling advertising by turning their broadcasts into entertainment.
The owner of the CBC on the other hand, is the public (you and me), and we should be demanding better and less ideologically driven reporting of news, events, and points of view.
Russ Babcock
Genelle