Saudi Arabia calls for 'climategate' investigation

[velkly]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30291.html

Saudi Arabia calls for 'climategate' investigation

COPENHAGEN — Saudi Arabia called for an independent investigation into “climategate” Monday, warning that the scandal over stolen emails threatened to undermine the global-warming negotiations beginning here.


“We believe this scandal — or what has been referred to as the ‘climategate’ scandal — we think this is definitely going to affect the nature of what could be trusted in our deliberations,” the Saudi Arabian negotiator said.


The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has promised to investigate the scandals, although its chairman said Monday that he said it provided no basis for questioning the science behind global warming.


But the Saudi negotiator told delegates that “the level of confidence is certainty shaken.”

All I can say is "well no shit..."

* bold is mine.

[steve762]

I generally think the Saudis suck, but I'm with them on this.

The bigger problem with Copenhagen that's not being addressed is that you're going to put some legally binding UN framework of world governance in-place, and just like other UN resolutions/sanctions etc, only the "internationally law-abiding" (generally meaning the US) are going to be held to the standard.

Remember how the (other nations pushing Copenhagen on us) Germans, French, Russians, etc, and Kofi Annan's buddies all somehow had been profiting off of Saddam Hussein's desires to buy arms and other banned products despite the UN sanctions (that were agreed to as an ending to the '91 Gulf War).

Think about all the nations in the UN who either don't have the means (financially), the will (politically), or really care because there are no consequences. Seriously, what consequences does Iran face for violating all the IAEA stuff? None. They made the IAEA (who stuck up for them) look like a bunch of smacked a$$es with the revelations about the second hidden nuke facility.

Think about how difficult it is for our government to effectively enforce anything (mandatory auto insurance, business licensing requirements, etc), and imagine them trying to regulate carbon. We've wasted so much money on "climate change" already.

If we really wanted to be environmentalists and preserve the land for our kids, we ought to be finding ways to reduce actual pollutants that have known impacts on life (i.e. carcinogens) when they're in air and water. If we wanted to help poor nations, how about helping them with clean water infrastructure (i.e. sewage treatment).

We're being sold down the river by stupid, international socialist politicians.

[velkly]

I generally think the Saudis suck, but I'm with them on this.

The bigger problem with Copenhagen that's not being addressed is that you're going to put some legally binding UN framework of world governance in-place, and just like other UN resolutions/sanctions etc, only the "internationally law-abiding" (generally meaning the US) are going to be held to the standard.

Remember how the (other nations pushing Copenhagen on us) Germans, French, Russians, etc, and Kofi Annan's buddies all somehow had been profiting off of Saddam Hussein's desires to buy arms and other banned products despite the UN sanctions (that were agreed to as an ending to the '91 Gulf War).

Think about all the nations in the UN who either don't have the means (financially), the will (politically), or really care because there are no consequences. Seriously, what consequences does Iran face for violating all the IAEA stuff? None. They made the IAEA (who stuck up for them) look like a bunch of smacked a$$es with the revelations about the second hidden nuke facility.

Think about how difficult it is for our government to effectively enforce anything (mandatory auto insurance, business licensing requirements, etc), and imagine them trying to regulate carbon. We've wasted so much money on "climate change" already.

If we really wanted to be environmentalists and preserve the land for our kids, we ought to be finding ways to reduce actual pollutants that have known impacts on life (i.e. carcinogens) when they're in air and water. If we wanted to help poor nations, how about helping them with clean water infrastructure (i.e. sewage treatment).

We're being sold down the river by stupid, international socialist politicians.

You're right on all accounts. There are those that truly believe in environmentalism, but they are largely overshadowed by or partner with the greed mongering front men such as Al Gore. The real agenda behind all of the current enviro-friendly laws/treaties is lining the pockets of the movement leaders and their special interests.

[PeaceAndLove]

Think about how difficult it is for our government to effectively enforce anything (mandatory auto insurance, business licensing requirements, etc), and imagine them trying to regulate carbon. We've wasted so much money on "climate change" already.

I'm not going to address the variety of objections to the whole "climate change" shebang, because they are at so many different levels.

Regulation is not perfect but it can work well. If auto insurance wasn't mandatory, much fewer people would get it (especially those with no assets).

It might be possible to regulate carbon grossly, basically through imports and use of large energy sources.

"Cap and Trade" really is about setting the limit to the maximum CO2 emissions from the entire world and letting the free market sort out how things shall be done. Worldwide regulation worked to stop the ozone layer depletion and control acid rain. Cheating needs to be stopped though.

Of course the Saudis are going to be totally against regulating fossil fuel burning. If it weren't for oil exports, they would have no value to the world.

And that is a good thing for terrorist exporting countries.

[PeaceAndLove]

Here's an analysis of the emails and the reactions to them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nnVQ2fROOg


Oh, BTW, I would be happy if it was a gigantic fraud and that the climate is going basically be the same as before. But I find it hard to believe that the majority of the scientists and science journalists are lying and that the industrial interests haven't been trying to muddle the picture.

Rejection of the climate change idea makes perfect sense psychologically. But there are a lot of people and industrialism has powerful effects, both intended and unintended.

[JayBell]

moved to Lounge.. be aware that the state and national POLITICS sections are FIREARM RELATED ONLY...

post all other non firearm related politics in the lounge

[velkly]

moved to Lounge.. be aware that the state and national POLITICS sections are FIREARM RELATED ONLY...

post all other non firearm related politics in the lounge

Sorry JB. I'm catching up from the weekend and reading the new changes now. Won't happen again.

[greasy]

I generally think the Saudis suck, but I'm with them on this.

Why is that?

Of course the Saudis are going to be totally against regulating fossil fuel burning. If it weren't for oil exports, they would have no value to the world.

Seriously?

[PeaceAndLove]

Seriously?

<<in response to "Saudi Arabia has no value to the world other than oil.">>

Economically speaking, yes.

See the wikipedia article on the Saudi economy. 90% of exports are petroleum products. Also, it is an absolute monarchy. They need money to keep the masses in line.

Other smaller oil countries like UAE know the oil can only last so long and are diversifying.

[kunsunoke]

(SNIP)
Oh, BTW, I would be happy if it was a gigantic fraud

Then be happy, because it is a gigantic fraud.

and that the climate is going basically be the same as before.

That will never happen. The sun's intensity varies, as does the earth's axial inclination and position.

We're in an interglacial period right now. We could go back into the last ice age or we could come out of it completely - in which case the earth will get a lot warmer and there will be much more carbon dioxide.

But then, as now, humans are going to have aught to do with it.

But I find it hard to believe that the majority of the scientists and science journalists are lying and that the industrial interests haven't been trying to muddle the picture.

The ones deemed "most important" by the news media and Washington politicians have been lying, and they've now been caught red-handed.

All the rest of the climate scientists have known anthropogenic global warming is a wank, but since the AGW pimp faction has iced them out of the peer-review process and the publishing process we don't hear about that. The climategate emails reveal that the pimps were active in trying to Alinsky any scientist who was skeptical of their work in any way, shape or form. Science is supposed to be open, transparent and repeatable, and when you try to destroy others based on dogma, that's actually religion instead.

Rejection of the climate change idea makes perfect sense psychologically. But there are a lot of people and industrialism has powerful effects, both intended and unintended.

Climate doesn't stop changing. It never has.

If you want to don a tinfoil hat and think that Big Oil is all-powerful, go right ahead. But you should realize that Big Socialism and Big Government are actually the ones who have some explaining to do. They're trying to sell cap and tax on the basis of some unicorn fantasy pseudoscience-religion. IMO the industrialists have every right to question the pimps and support the skeptics. At least the skeptical community doesn't rely on taxpayer dollars.