“Nations ‘Approve’ ‘Landmark’ ‘Climate Accord’ in Paris.”

The scare quotes in that NYT article title are mine.  Why?  Because they’re all fibs, at best.

  • ‘Approve.’ India and China are going to keep ignoring the damned thing; and this ‘accord’ will get passed by the US Congress when pigs fly.  Eliminate two of the biggest polluters and the (barely, still) world hegemon, and the rest is mere statistical noise.
  • ‘Landmark.’ The ‘world community’ passes meaningless ‘accords’ all the time.
  • ‘Climate accord.’ Try ‘agitprop feelgood exercise that comes with some legal bribery attached to get the Third World to sign on.’  …Then again, the NYT has font size limitations and a front page to consider, so perhaps I’m being unfair on this one.

Seriously, who believes this stuff? And do they habitually operate heavy machinery? It’s alarming to think that they might.

11 thoughts on ““Nations ‘Approve’ ‘Landmark’ ‘Climate Accord’ in Paris.””

  1. Many of ’em have drivers’ licenses, so .. if a Prius is “heavy” enough for your definition .. yes.

    1. May have licenses, but how many of these people do you think actually drive themselves around? As if they’d do something so plebeian.

      1. True story –
        I was on vacation at an east coast beach, and in the interest of “trying something educational”, we want to a presentation by some National Parks Service types.
        At the end, they open it for Q&A, and the greenies start asking about how they’re preparing for global warming and higher sea levels.
        They all drove themselves back to their beach cottages .. I think we walked, because “doing something exercise-ish”…

  2. Bah, humbug.

    Warmies are undoubtedly either the stupidest or the most corrupt idiots on the planet. Depending.

    It reminds me of a line from the movie “Ruthless People”:

    “That has to be the stupidest human being on the planet. Perhaps we should shoot him?”

  3. You can probably put the scare quotes around “nation” too. The very idea of national sovereignty seems pretty out of date by now.

  4. Stack up enough bullpucky, and you can call it a landmark.
    Won’t be much of a tourist attraction, though.

  5. Combine the “science ” of Piltdown Man with the hysteria of a Ponzi scheme and you end up with the ‘Going Concern’ of the Sale of Papal Indulgences : Nice work if you can get it

  6. “Seriously, who believes this stuff? And do they habitually operate heavy machinery? ”

    I was going to say something really awful about voting rights, but I thought about my nutty friend who fervently believes all of this stuff and it just makes me really sad.

    Interestingly, she says we should believe because Science, but follows crackpottery on pretty much any other topic. Is that a typical pattern?

  7. Need to have them stop having these meetings at expensive places with fancy hotels and restaurants.

    Maybe they should hold the next one in Biloxi and have the meals at the waffle house (or huddle house…I always forget which type of -le house is there across from one of the casino hotels).

    Or maybe, as I suggested in (I think) another blog — in Paris, Texas at the motel 6. I think it was around 42 bucks a night there (and they have smoking rooms, from what the web page says).

Comments are closed.