What Putin really said

[Old Rocks]

Read Putin’s U.N. General Assembly speech

Ladies and gentlemen, the issues that affect the future of all people include the challenge of global climate change. It is in our interest to make the U.N. Climate Change Conference to be held in December in Paris a success.

As part of our national contribution, we plan to reduce by 2030 the greenhouse emissions to 70, 75 percent of the 1990 level.

I suggest, however, we should take a wider view on this issue. Yes, we might defuse the problem for a while, by setting quotas on harmful emissions or by taking other measures that are nothing but tactical. But we will not solve it that way. We need a completely different approach.

We have to focus on introducing fundamental and new technologies inspired by nature, which would not damage the environment, but would be in harmony with it. Also, that would allow us to restore the balance upset by biosphere and technosphere (ph) upset by human activities.

It is indeed a challenge of planetary scope, but I'm confident that humankind has intellectual potential to address it. We need to join our efforts. I refer, first of all, to the states that have a solid research basis and have made significant advances in fundamental science.

We propose convening a special forum under the U.N. auspices for a comprehensive consideration of the issues related to the depletion of natural resources, destruction of habitat and climate change.

So many silly lies being told by the less than bright 'Conservatives' this needs to be cleared up. Putin clearly stated that AGW is real, and a problem. One that needs to be addressed.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

INTERVIEW: Obama Should Just Drop His Climate Change Hysteria Says Greenpeace Founder


y SIMON KENT15 Oct 20151,209

Barack Obama is talking blather when he says that climate change is the greatest challenge of our age according to Dr. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace and now proud climate sceptic. The U.S. President would be better advised to stick to topics he is vaguely on top of rather than trying to scare the world into believing that the end days is near due to the amount of man-made CO2 in the atmosphere.
__________

I think we should take the word of the co-founder of Greenpeace over someone pushing a UN agenda - be it Putin or Obama - it isn't the greatest challenge of our age - not even close - truth be known? It's not even an issue!

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Here is another clip - why does the UN need Putin, Obama and other leaders to push climate change? It's part of their agenda. It doesn't matter if it isn't true. They are determined to drive the one world order and they will continue perpetuating this lie while avoiding real problems (which they also created) such as the Syrian refugee immigration that is underway.

INTERVIEW: Obama Should Just Drop His Climate Change Hysteria Says Greenpeace Founder


Dr. Moore spoke to Breitbart London ahead of his address to the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) on Wednesday night. The topic of his talk was ‘Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?’ and he made it very clear that his answer to that question is a resounding ‘yes’.

It is his view that that no proof exists that carbon emissions from humans have caused even a “minor warming” of the earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years or more, a fact Obama chooses to ignore. Then again, President Obama does have company in the chorus of climate change activists using the issue as a vehicle to attack free-market capitalism.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon has long been a proponent of the fear, guilt and punishment scenario, warning of climate catastrophes ahead due to global warming and will use any venue to push that theme. Pope Francis is also on board along with former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and any number of Hollywood actors.

They all warn of terrible consequences if we ignore them and instead listen to the doubters like Dr. Moore. They will be at it again next month in Paris when the United Nations hosts the COP21 climate change conference designed to bring the world to the negotiating table and set a final timeline for drastic emissions cuts.

Before then, Dr. Moore is happy to repeat his challenge on man-made CO2 emissions to anyone who will listen.

He says the entire basis for the doomsday climate change scenario so beloved of politicians and scientists is the hypothesis that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide due to fossil fuel emissions will heat our planet to temperatures that would make it uninhabitable.

“In fact, the earth has been warming very gradually for 300 years, since the Little Ice Age ended, and that is long before heavy use of fossil fuels,” Dr. Moore said.

“Prior to the Little Ice Age, during the Medieval Warm Period, Vikings colonised Greenland and Newfoundland, when it was warmer there than today. During Roman times, it was warmer, long before expanded fossil fuel use revolutionised civilisation.

“The notion it would be catastrophic if carbon dioxide were to increase and average global temperature were to rise a few degrees is preposterous. The earth’s atmosphere has never been static, we know that for a fact, and variations are part of nature and therefore part of the planet’s cycle.”

Dr. Moore, who earned a PhD in ecology, is a scientist with little time for the true believers’ certainty they can predict the global climate with a computer model.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Read Putin’s U.N. General Assembly speech

Ladies and gentlemen, the issues that affect the future of all people include the challenge of global climate change. It is in our interest to make the U.N. Climate Change Conference to be held in December in Paris a success.

As part of our national contribution, we plan to reduce by 2030 the greenhouse emissions to 70, 75 percent of the 1990 level.

I suggest, however, we should take a wider view on this issue. Yes, we might defuse the problem for a while, by setting quotas on harmful emissions or by taking other measures that are nothing but tactical. But we will not solve it that way. We need a completely different approach.

We have to focus on introducing fundamental and new technologies inspired by nature, which would not damage the environment, but would be in harmony with it. Also, that would allow us to restore the balance upset by biosphere and technosphere (ph) upset by human activities.

It is indeed a challenge of planetary scope, but I'm confident that humankind has intellectual potential to address it. We need to join our efforts. I refer, first of all, to the states that have a solid research basis and have made significant advances in fundamental science.

We propose convening a special forum under the U.N. auspices for a comprehensive consideration of the issues related to the depletion of natural resources, destruction of habitat and climate change.

So many silly lies being told by the less than bright 'Conservatives' this needs to be cleared up. Putin clearly stated that AGW is real, and a problem. One that needs to be addressed.

Well, if he keeps damaging the Russian economy, of course their CO2 emissions will fall. So what?