Obama Disregards Climategate Emails Controversy: Ready to Commit U.S. Taxpayers at Copenhagen into Paying for “Poorer” Countries to Adapt to “Climate Change”

Copenhagen Treaty: “New World Government” Based on Faulty, or False Climate Data?

University at Center of Climategate Controversy: We’re Going to Release Data BUT Depends on Whether Scientists Under Scrutiny will “Give Permission”, and, will Take Several Months

IOwnTheWorld

“There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production — with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas — parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia — where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.”

Care to guess when this written and why?
(Answer Below)

The University at the center of the Climategate controversy, the University of East Anglia, has announced it will “release” the raw data related to the leaked emails which may show top global warming scientists attempted to hide, skew, or lied about global warming data. But, and this is a BIG BUT, the release is contingent on:

1. Getting permission from the scientists at the center of the Climategate storm to release it, and,

2. It will take “several months” because:

“Responses may take several months and that some countries may refuse permission due to the economic value of the data.”

So there you have it, not only has the University “punted” the Climategate ball to the scientist’s “hands”, it’s also “hiding” behind the “some countries may refuse permission” excuse in order to delay the release of the data until well after the week-long Copenhapen climate change Treaty beginning on December 9.

The “economic” value of the data is estimated in the trillions as the stage is being set for Obama to attend the Copenhagen Treaty talks beginning December 9. Obama is expected to not only announce the U.S. will lower carbon emissions but is also expected to commit U.S. taxpayers to footing the “bill”-translate “trillions, as this will be a “long haul “adaptation debt”-to pay for “poorer nations” to “adapt” to climate change.

Just look who’s excited about Obama’s trip to Copenhagen, the UN, who already has U.S. “climate change” dollar signs dancing in their heads:

Yvo de Boer, head of the U.N. climate directorate, said in an e-mail message that he would like to see the U.S. target in writing and a pledge of money to help poorer nations adapt to a changing climate.

“If the president comes in the first week to announce that,” de Boer said, “it would be a major boost to the conference.”

This leads us back to Climategate, where the controversy over whether the leaked emails do indeed show efforts by the world’s most “foremost” “global warming” scientists to “massage”, “hide”, or lie about their results. Results which have been used as the foundation for Obama’s Cap and Trade legislation which would devastate the coal industry and cause American’s utilities to, in Obama’s own words, “skyrocket”. And, the Copenhagen Treaty, where the U.S. may sign a treaty which will establish a new world government based on “climate change”, and where U.S taxpayers would “foot the bill” for “poorer countries”.

From the Wall Street Journal:

The “scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention” that starts on page 18 contains the provision for a “government.” The aim is to give a new as yet unnamed U.N. body the power to directly intervene in the financial, economic, tax and environmental affairs of all the nations that sign the Copenhagen treaty.

The reason for the power grab is clear enough: Clause after complicated clause of the draft treaty requires developed countries to pay an “adaptation debt” to developing countries to supposedly support climate change mitigation. Clause 33 on page 39 says that “by 2020 the scale of financial flows to support adaptation in developing countries must be [at least $67 billion] or [in the range of $70 billion to $140 billion per year].”

The paragraph at the beginning of this post is an excerpt from 1975’s “The Cooling Wind” by Peter Gynne on the fears of scientists who believed we were entering a global “cooling” phase.

For those unfamiliar with the “scientific” “Global Cooling” prediction in the 1970’s, Times’ Science: Another Ice Age? is a “must read” as well as Gwnne’s “The Cooling World”.

From “Science: Another Ice Age?”:

In Africa, drought continues for the sixth consecutive year, adding terribly to the toll of famine victims. During 1972 record rains in parts of the U.S., Pakistan and Japan caused some of the worst flooding in centuries. In Canada’s wheat belt, a particularly chilly and rainy spring has delayed planting and may well bring a disappointingly small harvest. Rainy Britain, on the other hand, has suffered from uncharacteristic dry spells the past few springs. A series of unusually cold winters has gripped the American Far West, while New England and northern Europe have recently experienced the mildest winters within anyone’s recollection.

U.S. emissions target may not clear air at Copenhagen

U-turn on climate change ‘cover up’ as university says it will publish leaked email data