In Stephane "Bumbledore" Dion's Priority Poop-O-Gram is a photo of a Liberal Poop-O-Gram which Liberal MP Ken Dryden, from Toronto, sent in Apr. 2008 to households in St. Catharines.
Dryden’s poopy missive prominently featured an ominous quote from Rajendra Pachauri, the chair of the IPCC, saying: “This particular government has been a government of skeptics. They do not want to do anything on climate change.”
Ooooh!
Seeing that Pachauri is good enough to be quoted by the Liberals when it comes to smug lectures about climate change in Canada, why isn’t Dryden explaining why Pachauri sings a completely different tune in India?
Here’s what Lawrence Solomon wrote in “India rejects climate doom, pursues economic boom”, (National Post, July 21, 2008):
“India loves the UN’s climate change policies and so does India’s representative at the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri.
Why the love-in? The Indian government’s new “National Action Plan on Climate Change,” which Pachauri helped craft, plainly explains why: The UN formally establishes that global warming is a matter of secondary importance to India, allowing the world’s largest democracy to pursue its own best interests.
As the National Action Plan unapologetically puts it, the UN’s climate change convention “recognizes that ‘economic and social development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of the developing country parties.’ Thus, developing countries are not required to divert resources from development priorities by implementing projects involving incremental costs.”
And India doesn’t. Throughout its National Action Plan, India demonstrates that it will divert precious little of its scarce resources to solving the climate crisis. Where greenhouse gases will be curbed — for example, by aggressively building hydro dams or modernizing industry — the curbs will be a by-product of India’s national security concerns or economic development plans.
The UN’s climate change convention is even better than that — it’s a money-maker for India and a lever with which to obtain western technology. As the Action Plan makes clear, there’s only one condition under which India need spend a rupee to help curb global warming “— (if) these incremental costs are borne by developed countries and the needed technologies are transferred.”
Apart from wanting to develop, and wanting transfers of western wealth, the Indian government has one other reason for putting global warming on the back burner — although it agrees that climate change may one day pose a threat, the National Action Plan states boldly that man-made global warming may not exist, and that if it does exist, its existence may be of no account to India.
“No firm link between the changes described below and warming due to anthropogenic climate change has yet been established,” the report states matter-of-factly, before proceeding to list the areas in which the science is not settled.
Parts of India have warmed, the Action Plan explains, and parts have cooled. Monsoon rains have increased in some areas and decreased in others. There have been no marked long-term trends in droughts or floods. Some regions have had a greater and others a lesser frequency of severe storms. Neither do the Himalayan glaciers demonstrate any consistent trend.
The upshot? With climate change such an ephemeral threat, why spend money on this possible non-event. Much better to focus on maximizing wealth and health.
The prescription? Grow the economy as fast as one billion people can possibly manage by building hundreds of new coal-fired power plants — India is planning a five-fold increase by 2030, making it the world’s third largest CO2 producer.
This National Action Plan is no ordinary report from a low-level government bureaucracy. It was commissioned last year by the Prime Minister’s Council on Climate Change, chaired by the Prime Minister of India himself, and has the imprimatur of both the Government of India and the Prime Minister’s council.
Neither is Rajendra Pachauri an ordinary government representative at the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. He is its chairman, in effect the world’s most senior climate change official. As such, he has been a vehement defender of the UN Panel’s position, brooking no dissent from the view that time was short if the planet was to avert climate change catastrophe. As one example, when the mild-mannered Danish statistician Bjorn Lomberg, a believer in man-made climate change, concluded that climate change was unlikely to cause catastrophe, Pachauri likened him to Hitler.
How did Pachauri react when his own prime minister, and the government that he represents at the UN, not only downplayed man-made global warming but positively asserted that there is no proof for it?
He vehemently endorsed his Prime Minister’s National Action Plan. “We are an expanding economy. How can we levy a cap [on CO2 emissions] when millions are living with deprivation?,” he told the Indian press. The National Action Plan should be implemented and the west should “get off the back of India.””
*
'Get off our backs', says Pachauri: this is the spokesman Liberals use to fearmonger Canadians on climate change - while his own country has carte-blanche to construct hundreds of new coal-fired coal plants?!
Who wouldn’t be skeptical when Liberals such as MP Ken Dryden use hypocrites like this, as their spokesperson/role-model to somehow legitimize their shifty Grit tax schemes?
Will the Liberals also be using Pachauri's line to defend their re-shifted Green Shaft against criticism?
Will Bumbledore Dion's Liberals, to accuse those who don’t subscribe to the Liberal's end-of-the-world, man-made climate-doom scenarios, eventually play the 'you’re Hitler' card as well?!
-
...and isn't it funny how in 2015, these same Liberal GreenFear-mongering GreenShafters had nothing to say about the disaster that was Rajendra Pachauri?!
*
Stephane Bumbledore Dion again pooped up - now in Liberal Justin Turdeu's cabinet - still pushing his Liberal GreenFear-mongering agenda. As the Globe and Mail's Bill Curry reported on Nov. 18, 2015:
Dryden’s poopy missive prominently featured an ominous quote from Rajendra Pachauri, the chair of the IPCC, saying: “This particular government has been a government of skeptics. They do not want to do anything on climate change.”
Ooooh!
Seeing that Pachauri is good enough to be quoted by the Liberals when it comes to smug lectures about climate change in Canada, why isn’t Dryden explaining why Pachauri sings a completely different tune in India?
Here’s what Lawrence Solomon wrote in “India rejects climate doom, pursues economic boom”, (National Post, July 21, 2008):
“India loves the UN’s climate change policies and so does India’s representative at the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri.
Why the love-in? The Indian government’s new “National Action Plan on Climate Change,” which Pachauri helped craft, plainly explains why: The UN formally establishes that global warming is a matter of secondary importance to India, allowing the world’s largest democracy to pursue its own best interests.
As the National Action Plan unapologetically puts it, the UN’s climate change convention “recognizes that ‘economic and social development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of the developing country parties.’ Thus, developing countries are not required to divert resources from development priorities by implementing projects involving incremental costs.”
And India doesn’t. Throughout its National Action Plan, India demonstrates that it will divert precious little of its scarce resources to solving the climate crisis. Where greenhouse gases will be curbed — for example, by aggressively building hydro dams or modernizing industry — the curbs will be a by-product of India’s national security concerns or economic development plans.
The UN’s climate change convention is even better than that — it’s a money-maker for India and a lever with which to obtain western technology. As the Action Plan makes clear, there’s only one condition under which India need spend a rupee to help curb global warming “— (if) these incremental costs are borne by developed countries and the needed technologies are transferred.”
Apart from wanting to develop, and wanting transfers of western wealth, the Indian government has one other reason for putting global warming on the back burner — although it agrees that climate change may one day pose a threat, the National Action Plan states boldly that man-made global warming may not exist, and that if it does exist, its existence may be of no account to India.
“No firm link between the changes described below and warming due to anthropogenic climate change has yet been established,” the report states matter-of-factly, before proceeding to list the areas in which the science is not settled.
Parts of India have warmed, the Action Plan explains, and parts have cooled. Monsoon rains have increased in some areas and decreased in others. There have been no marked long-term trends in droughts or floods. Some regions have had a greater and others a lesser frequency of severe storms. Neither do the Himalayan glaciers demonstrate any consistent trend.
The upshot? With climate change such an ephemeral threat, why spend money on this possible non-event. Much better to focus on maximizing wealth and health.
The prescription? Grow the economy as fast as one billion people can possibly manage by building hundreds of new coal-fired power plants — India is planning a five-fold increase by 2030, making it the world’s third largest CO2 producer.
This National Action Plan is no ordinary report from a low-level government bureaucracy. It was commissioned last year by the Prime Minister’s Council on Climate Change, chaired by the Prime Minister of India himself, and has the imprimatur of both the Government of India and the Prime Minister’s council.
Neither is Rajendra Pachauri an ordinary government representative at the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. He is its chairman, in effect the world’s most senior climate change official. As such, he has been a vehement defender of the UN Panel’s position, brooking no dissent from the view that time was short if the planet was to avert climate change catastrophe. As one example, when the mild-mannered Danish statistician Bjorn Lomberg, a believer in man-made climate change, concluded that climate change was unlikely to cause catastrophe, Pachauri likened him to Hitler.
How did Pachauri react when his own prime minister, and the government that he represents at the UN, not only downplayed man-made global warming but positively asserted that there is no proof for it?
He vehemently endorsed his Prime Minister’s National Action Plan. “We are an expanding economy. How can we levy a cap [on CO2 emissions] when millions are living with deprivation?,” he told the Indian press. The National Action Plan should be implemented and the west should “get off the back of India.””
*
'Get off our backs', says Pachauri: this is the spokesman Liberals use to fearmonger Canadians on climate change - while his own country has carte-blanche to construct hundreds of new coal-fired coal plants?!
Who wouldn’t be skeptical when Liberals such as MP Ken Dryden use hypocrites like this, as their spokesperson/role-model to somehow legitimize their shifty Grit tax schemes?
Will the Liberals also be using Pachauri's line to defend their re-shifted Green Shaft against criticism?
Will Bumbledore Dion's Liberals, to accuse those who don’t subscribe to the Liberal's end-of-the-world, man-made climate-doom scenarios, eventually play the 'you’re Hitler' card as well?!
-
...and isn't it funny how in 2015, these same Liberal GreenFear-mongering GreenShafters had nothing to say about the disaster that was Rajendra Pachauri?!
*
Stephane Bumbledore Dion again pooped up - now in Liberal Justin Turdeu's cabinet - still pushing his Liberal GreenFear-mongering agenda. As the Globe and Mail's Bill Curry reported on Nov. 18, 2015:
"Few countries have a bigger stake in global climate change talks than the Philippines, which is hosting this week’s Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation summit.
This nation of more than 7,000 islands deals regularly with deadly floods and is still reeling from last month’s Typhoon Koppu, which left 58 dead.
The nation is among the most vulnerable to climate change and is leading a push to have the Nov. 30 Paris conference set a goal of keeping the rise in global temperatures to below 1.5 degrees Celsius. Countries committed in 2010 to a target of 2 degrees Celsius.
World leaders are using the setting of this year’s APEC summit to build momentum for an aggressive deal in Paris.
Yet Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Dion says the Paris conference isn’t likely to deliver the breakthrough required.
“If you compare with what the science is asking us to do, it’s very unlikely that Paris will deliver a two-degree-Celsius agreement,” he said, pointing to a recent United Nations report showing that actions announced to date will only keep the rise in temperatures to 2.7 degrees.
“But if we have no agreement we may go to three or four [degrees]. So 2.7 is not what the science is asking us to do. It’s fair to say that we need to do much more,” he said.
In the lead up to the summit, Mr. Dion said Canada will be working with France, the United States and other nations to push for a five-year review in the hope of getting better results next time. Mr. Dion discussed the idea Tuesday in Manila with his Chinese counterpart, foreign minister Wang Yi.
“Canada is strongly supporting that,” he said. “We understand [from meeting] with China that they are supporting that as well and so we hope that this is something we’ll be able to do to improve the Paris agreement to go toward what scientists are asking us to do.”
*
It's fair to say that Bill Curry didn't analyze Kyodiot Stephane Dion's record of GeenFear mongering, nor did he provide any counter balance to Dion's cherry-picked 'man-is-to-blame' greenshevik climatalarmism.
Canadian tax payers are most vulnerable to AGW-pushing climate-change hoaxters under Liberal leadership, abetted by a stenographic, Lib-friendly, ask-no-questions press.
No comments:
Post a Comment