For many months, NewsBusters has informed readers that when it comes to current events involving global warming, if you have any interest in learning the facts, or at least a close approximation of them, you must rely upon foreign press outlets.
What transpired on Saturday is a perfect example of this maxim: after the United States got virtually everything it wanted from the United Nations climate change conference in Bali, it gave in to a relatively minor demand from delegates of developing countries.
Ignoring the facts, America's press badly misrepresented the event as a major capitulation by the Bush administration, and a huge victory for global warming alarmists.
Yet, a number of articles published across the Pond Sunday expressed a view of these proceedings U.S. media dare not share. Take for example this Sunday Times article entitled "Bali Deal Leaves Greens In Despair" (emphasis added throughout, h/t Benny Peiser):
AS more than 180 countries agreed a deal on climate change at the UN summit in Bali, environmentalists punctured the mood of self-congratulation by pointing to the failure to agree firm targets for reducing emissions.
Although the main industrialised countries, including America, agreed to cut their greenhouse gas emissions, they refused to agree to an European Union proposal for a target of 25%-40% cuts by 2020.
Campaigners claimed the world's biggest carbon emitters, including America, Japan and Canada, will now be free to carry on expanding such emissions for many more years to come.
"This deal is very disappointing," said Tony Juniper, director of Friends of the Earth. "This conference has failed to give us a clear destination." The target backed by the EU, including the UK, was in line with the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has warned that global temperatures could otherwise rise by 2C over the next century.
Doesn't sound like what most of America's media reported on Saturday, does it? Now, here's the money shot:
On Friday, the EU conceded a compromise that simply acknowledged that "deep cuts in global emissions will be required to achieve the ultimate objective".
Paula Dobriansky, the US under secretary of state for democracy and global affairs, initially said she could not accept it.
She was roundly booed and Kevin Conrad, head of Papua New Guinea's delegation, won mass applause when he told her and her colleague James Connaughton: "We seek your leadership, but if you cannot lead, leave it to the rest of us. Get out of the way." Such language is unusual at an international conference and reflected the anger that had built up against America.
Later Dobriansky told The Sunday Times that she had changed her mind after listening to the submissions made by Brazil and South Africa, who had accepted that developing countries should also cut their carbon emissions.
As NewsBusters mentioned yesterday, this was a HUGE victory for America and the Bush administration, as such nations have been refusing for years to participate in carbon emissions cuts. By holding to its position all day Friday, and threatening this conference with resulting in absolutely nothing after almost two weeks of deliberations, the U.S. forced developing nations to finally accept their responsibility in this matter.
Without question, an honest, unbiased media here would also have pointed this out. Sadly, our press members dare not ever give credit to the Bush administration regardless of whether it is indeed warranted.
But that's just the beginning, for the British Telegraph on Sunday also went where few American press outlets dare (emphasis added throughout, h/t Benny Peiser):
The basic purpose of Bali, as we were tirelessly reminded by the BBC, Al Gore, old Uncle Ban Ki-moon and pretty well everyone else, was that this vast assemblage of people should gather together to vilify George Bush.
It was he alone who stood in the way of saving the planet, by refusing even to sign Kyoto into law, let alone participate in the new historic agreement which is to follow, and to discuss which Bali was all about.
(It is conveniently forgotten that it was the US Senate which unanimously voted not to ratify Kyoto in 1998, when the vice-president of the USA was Al Gore).
Hmmm. This guy sounds like somebody near and dear to all of you, wouldn't you agree? But I digress:
In the end, as in all good comedies, the "baddies" came round to the side of light, the US representative made her "climbdown" by saying that her country was now ready to join the "consensus", and everyone could go home happy.
The reality of Bali, however, was that all this vilification of America as the "world's worst polluter" was only displacement activity - to disguise the fact that, when it comes to the crunch, no one is really prepared to step off the bandwagon of economic growth, by making the unthinkable sacrifices which would be required if any of them actually meant what they said.
I like this guy. How 'bout you?
They are all happy to work themselves into an intense state of excitement by chanting their quasi-religious mantra: that there is now "absolute scientific consensus" that Planet Earth is doomed unless we cut our carbon emissions by 50 per cent by 2050.
But no one is prepared to take any serious step towards that inconceivable goal unless everyone else jumps too.
[...]
Thus Bali ends in a wonderfully meaningless compromise, whereby everyone, including America, agrees that they want their carbon-free pie-in-the-sky, so long as they don't yet have to sign up to actual figures and mandatory targets.
The only people really rejoicing in Bali were all those beady-eyed businessmen who have sussed out that the "carbon trading schemes" set up under Kyoto are turning into the most colossal commercial racket of our day.
As for the armadas of politicians and officials, as the man from the EU said, they can look forward to "many meetings, many discussions, many people passing many hours doing things", lasting from here to the crack of doom (which incidentally may never arrive, because, though CO2 levels are still rising, global temperatures are not - a fact mentioned in Bali by precisely no one).
Can you envision a mainstream American reporter writing such and staying employed?
Yet, there was still more from the Telegraph which, in the name of real journalism, actually uncovered an inconvenient truth U.S. press probably can't handle (emphasis added, h/t Benny Peiser):
Russia is to blame for the fact that the agreement contained no figure for the "deep cuts" needed in carbon emissions, The Sunday Telegraph has learned.
In tense negotiations late on Friday, officials of a smaller group of just 12 countries almost agreed a footnote that would have referred to the need for a 50 per cent cut by 2050.
A western official said: "We got to the phrase 'long-term goal' and the Russians set on the whole thing. They would not accept any target, not even in a footnote referring to the science."
Fearful that the Russians were prepared to scupper the whole agreement, other countries backed off.
"That is why it is weak," one source said. "We thought if we did not give in, they would pull it all apart."
Now how can this be? After all, Nobel Laureate Al Gore, to great applause in Bali and in newsrooms throughout America, said "...the United States is principally responsible for obstructing progress here."
I guess former U.N. ambassador John Bolton was right when he said on Friday "...it's not unusual for Vice President Gore to be wrong."
No, it's not. And, sadly, it's not unusual for the American press to be wrong either.
Too bad for us.
Related articles:
Weather Channel Founder: Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History'
Manic Misinterpretations of Climate Change Capitulation by US in Bali
Bolton Bashes Gore's Bali Buffoonery
Global Warming and the Tax the Rich Scheme
Bush Wrongly Blamed for America’s Non-participation in Kyoto
Your Computer is Causing Global Warming
Skeptics Denied Press Credentials at UN Climate Meeting in Bali
Scientists Send Letter to UN: Give Up Futile Climate Change Battle
Gore: U.S. Responsible For Obstructing Progress on Global Warming
How Gore and Media Fabricated a Global Warming Consensus
Headline: 'Pope Condemns the Climate Change Prophets of Doom'
New Australian Prime Minister Flip-flops on Climate Change Pledge
Correlation Falsification: The Missing Global Warming - CO2 Link
British Headline: ‘Gore Criticised for Lining His Own Pockets’
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.















Editor at Large

Comments Policy
I don't know. It may seem
December 16, 2007 - 14:01 ET by ArchConservativeI don't know. It may seem like a win but I think it's still a failure because we agreed to anything that was said there at that anti-capitalist, anti-American free-for-all.
We should have capitulated to no one. We should have stood up and said, "You go ahead with your cuts in emissions. We won't abide by Kyoto or Bali." That would have been true leadership. By even giving an inch to these people, it's perceived that we folded.
The under Secretary should have said the following: "though CO2 levels are still rising, global temperatures are not" but as NB stated,it is "a fact mentioned in Bali by precisely no one".
It is a sad day when Russia is the one country to stand up to these envior-weenie, neoprogs. Sad day indeed.
AC
December 16, 2007 - 14:09 ET by Noel SheppardAC,
I feel your pain :-), but don't agree. In the end, this was once again brilliant eco-diplomacy by Bush and Co. Instead of the conference ending with the US looking instransigent and blocking all progress, the money shot is that America gave in to international pressure in order to save the world.
Yet, the ground we lost on this issue is almost nothing. Once again, the people of the world got together to force us into economically damaging CO2 cuts, and once again went home with a roadmap to us discussing it further.
It's poetry if you think about it. ns
Mr. Sheppard, I really
December 16, 2007 - 14:16 ET by ArchConservativeMr. Sheppard,
I really hope you're right. Maybe I've just been beaten once too many times by our side. We give in and give in and give in and I'm sick of it. You know this issue better than I do so I will give the benefit of the doubt. It's just hard for a lot of us out here to see that light at the end of the tunnel when we've been run over so many times in the past.
Maybe I'm just wishing for someone to do the ol' Jimmy Cagney and push that grapefruit into the face of the neoprogs. But, thank you for defending your side, it makes me at least rest a little easier.
AC
December 16, 2007 - 14:28 ET by Noel SheppardAC,
Please call me Noel.
Well, think of it this way: For all intents and purposes, Bush and Co. pushed this discussion out to 2009. If a Democrat is in the White House at that time, we're going further into the deepend on this issue, and whatever happened in Bali just delayed this leftward shift by maybe two years, right? This will also make it more difficult for Congress to do anything until 2009 as well, correct?
On the other hand, let's assume a Rep wins in 2008. Now, this new GOP president is at the table maybe with a similar view as the current one. Maybe cycle 24 has started by then with temperatures continuing to decline, and another sub-par hurricane season in the books. At that point, AGW might be even further out of Americans' minds.
The Stones sang years ago about time being on my side. With this kind of an issue, especially with climate events beginning to disprove the hysteria, Mick and the Boys are right on target, as was this agreement. Think about it. ns
Noel
December 16, 2007 - 14:42 ET by MrShySorry to interject here, but it's vital that I correct you on the last bit you wrote.
It's not "Think about it.", it's "Think on it, son.", as Professor Truth likes to close all his posts with.
(We now resume the serious discussion taking place on this thread :))
You know you're a pervert when you're a troll like Pervessor TP&C, repeatedly posting perverted things about Mr. Shy's Shywear.
Mike
December 16, 2007 - 14:57 ET by Noel SheppardMike,
I sit corrected. :-) ns
Pervessor TP's problem is.
December 16, 2007 - 15:52 ET by danboPervessor TP's problem is. Most of us have thought on it.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Spot-on
December 16, 2007 - 14:28 ET by ThisnThatExcellent reporting, ns. Once again, the new media in the U.S. surges ahead and reports facts, gives us all something to think about. This is truely the death knell of the old MSM. I wonder what it's going to take for them to recognize this?
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
Nail hit on head:
December 16, 2007 - 14:33 ET by dervish"no one is really prepared to step off the bandwagon of economic growth, by making the unthinkable sacrifices which would be required if any of them actually meant what they said."
This was a feel-good schmoozefest from the beginning. Everyone was supposed to meet, sign onto a high-toned agreement, have a group hug, and then go home and forget about it. (Except, probably, to criticize the US nonstop for not living up to its commitment.)
All is revealed in that smarmy logo: note that the hands aren't shown shaking in any sort of agreement -- they're just holding on to each other while "We Are the World" is being sung.
Shaking hands
December 17, 2007 - 01:23 ET by CiampinoThat's a strange handshake indeed: a brown right hand awkwardly holding a white left hand.
-
December 16, 2007 - 14:35 ET by dahliatraverswhen it comes to current events involving global warming, if you have any interest in learning the facts, or at least a close approximation of them, you must rely upon foreign press outlets.
Looking at all of the headlines on the Google news link which are some variation of "US Capitulates in Bali", it makes me wonder if the American media is emulating AGW advocates by using the consensus instead of the fact approach to reporting the news.
Thank you for giving us the straight scoop today and all this week on Bali, Noel.
DT
December 16, 2007 - 14:38 ET by Noel SheppardDT,
My pleasure. I wish I could have written more on this issue this week, but I had end of the year client issues all week. Next week, too. This recent market volatility, along with AMT nonsense has got people a tad un-nerved. ns
What doesn't make sense to
December 16, 2007 - 15:26 ET by ckc1227What doesn't make sense to me is why the USA has to join in on their reindeer games? If Europe and other countries feel this is really the disaster they claim, seems to me they'd start drastically cutting their own emissions to address the problem, whether the USA, etc, joins in or not. At the least, doing so would possibly offset some of the contributions of these countries. For some reason though, they do not, which speaks volumes, in my opinion, about how serious a problem they truly believe AGW is.
If a forest fire was approaching my house, I wouldn't hesitate to act just because my neighbor does, yet the pro-AGW countries do.
Why is that? Because this isn't about AGW at all, that's why.
Bingo ckc
December 16, 2007 - 18:15 ET by VT Con ManYou got it. This is simply a ploy to pull the US into a lose/win scenario, where we lose and the third worlders and non-producing countries sit back and watch us scramble, oh yeah, and laugh as we will owe the UN idiots 50 gazzillion dollars in carbon penalties, blah blah blah. But, luckily, it looks as though we came away with a "commitment" to reduce our emissions. A non binding "commitment". heh heh heh.
Great analysis Noel!
December 16, 2007 - 16:21 ET by Gary P JacksonGreat analysis Noel!
.
December 16, 2007 - 20:00 ET by dervishSpeaking of your green despair...
Or maybe it was just that he realized he forgot to change out of his BeeGees costume.
- MAIOR RISUS, ACRIOR ENSIS (The bigger the smile, the sharper the sword.)
The Cure For The "Disease" Will Cure The Diseased
December 16, 2007 - 22:22 ET by Intellectual HonestyYou are on the money with the "Time is on our side" Noel.
Any thinking person that may even agree with the "consensus" knows that the idea of cutting carbon emission by 25% to 40% is beyond the realm of possibility without a complete transformation of life as we know it. When certain businesses/trades are eradicated/outlawed somewhere/somehow, you will see a swing in opinion change very fast. One huge energy blackout will short term change some behaviour but long term will make people realize that many vaunted leaders in politics, industry, media are placing us on a suicide mission. And it is then that the hypocrisy of these leaders will get much bigger play even in the portals of the LMSM when it becomes clear that the rules they have promoted don't apply to them.
Will John and Theresa Kerry's wean themselves off the five mansions, an island, a few yachts, "Theresa's SUV" and a handful of private jets? Will John Edwards forego his 28,000 sq. ft. compound and move into a 2-bedroom apartment? Will Al Gore only choose to fly coach on commercial flights? Will Al Gore cut down his electric useage from the $26,000 high mark? Will Sheryl Crow, Barbara Streisand, Uma Thurman etc. really downgrade their lifestyle's to the average American level?
Nope. And that is the ultimate trump card - hypocrisy. Because no matter how far this GW craziness gets, there will be a never-ending stream of hypocrisy by the elitist proponents of GW legislation, targets, conferences, etc.
And Newsbusters will be right there but surely not alone. Thousand of anti-hypocrisy activists, armed with cameras, microphones, the internet, official records, will prove at a minimum the axiom of these elitists: Do as I say, not as I do.
honestly
December 16, 2007 - 22:34 ET by botgi vow today that my carbon footprint for the remainder of my entire life will be less than the Goracles has been for the last year! (probally with 10 months to spare)
"everytime you take a shower, you are a mass murderer" -- the Pervessor
Good One!
December 16, 2007 - 22:43 ET by Intellectual HonestyAnd scary how true it is and yet so many GW believers give them a pass.
botg
December 17, 2007 - 03:49 ET by Septemberi vow today that my carbon footprint for the remainder of my entire
life will be less than the Goracles has been for the last year!
(probally with 10 months to spare)
I will vow right alongside you. Perhaps we can start a trend. A New Year's Resolution promising to keep one's Co2 print below the level of the Gore from January 1st forward. Shouldn't be too hard as I won't have to do anything differently.
"Global" Warming is the Biggest White Elephant in History
December 17, 2007 - 05:25 ET by jonathanandersonWhite elephant : something a deceived and vain minority think is immensely valuable, yet has no practical use and wastes every dime invested in its nonsensical upkeep.
We NEED Global Warming to Save the Earth
December 17, 2007 - 05:46 ET by jonathanandersonEver spent a winter in Chicago?
Or New England? or Canada? or Siberia?
My God, man ... we NEED global warming to save the planet from the global disaster of "global freezing".
If these idiots did the same thing with the numbers from FREEZING weather as they do with the numbers from WARM weather ... you could build a doomsday scenario for global catastrophe from global COOLING.
Cherry-pick your cold temperatures, have weather stations put their thermometers in the shade instead of on brick walls exposed to 10 hours of direct sunlight, create computer models that "prove" global cooling and the threat of the next ice age, get a Democrat who could barely maintain a 'C' in basic science to become the messiah for your cause, and then create billions of dollars in government funding to keep your religion operating into perpetuity.
Right you are. For the
December 17, 2007 - 10:39 ET by Seabeach4348Right you are.
For the past couple of weeks the dweebs on the Global Warming Channel (aka the Weather Channel) have been foaming at the mouth over the "record breaking heat" in the southeastern US while totally ignoring the other 80% of the states which has been experiencing record cold with lots of snow.
And the latest dumb propaganda commercial with the kids going "tick, tock, tick tock" as if they had clockworks for brains is preverse at the least.