Today we will analyze the upcoming UN Conference's "Thematic Session," entitled "Climate Change–Cities and Communities in Action". While this topic can raise some "heated" debate, if you'll pardon the expression, it is apparent that this issue is more emotional than factual, like most UN-driven issues.
Let's examine the official description of this session and then analyze its contents.
"As outlined in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and other reports elaborated over the years by the scientific community, as well as public and private sector entities, climate change with its associated risks is among the defining issues of our time, the impact of which is global in scope and unprecedented in scale and is already disrupting communities and livelihoods, especially of those living in poverty.
However, there is a growing recognition that affordable, scalable solutions are currently available that will enable us all to leapfrog to more green, clean, resilient economies in the long run. Cities and communities, underpinned by strong advocacy from civil society are acting on reducing emissions and on development for resiliency, with innovative strategies for carbon neutrality and resilient infrastructure; transportation and energy systems decarbonisation, zero emissions buildings; innovative financing mechanisms and behaviour change among consumers, producers and policymakers.
With the UN Secretary-General’s Climate Action Summit 2019 taking place in September 2019, this session will be an opportunity to boost ambition and accelerate action to implement the Paris Agreement, with a focus on local action and the role of youth."
We begin with the frightening tale of how "the impact of [climate change] is global in scope and unprecedented in scale and is already disrupting communities and livelihoods". Oh, the terror! Of course, since it is "global" in scale, the only solution is global governance.
A historical fact that is not taught in government indoctrination centers (ie, public schools) is that the United Nations started out as the League of Nations, which presented itself as the solution to worldwide wars immediately after World War I, which it was responsible for creating. (Remember the Hegelian Dialectic? "Problem-Reaction-Solution" You cause the problem and then offer yourself as the solution.) They believed that if they caused a situation horrific enough, people would clamor to give up their freedom in order for the League of Nations to save them. After all, we can't have a "world war" anymore if there is a "world government," can we? When this plan failed, they started World War II and presented themselves again as the solution, now rebranded as the United Nations. While they haven't ever "officially" been declared the world's government, they do, in fact, act like it, and even the United States government bows to their authority.
What's important to comprehend, however, is their primary methodology: scare tactics, whether real or imagined. For decades, they have tried one thing after another–overpopulation, a new ice age, imaginary holes in the sky, global warming, and now the ambiguous "climate change"–never actually able to get people whipped up into enough of a frenzy that they would finally give up their liberties. Until now.
The opening statement also assumes the high position of carrying the authority of the IPCC and other experts and, of course, years worth of reports. You can just see them piling up all over the offices at the UN. No wonder they're in such a hurry! This, ladies and gentlemen, is a logical fallacy known as "appeal to authority
." What makes this sort of argument particularly egregious is that it is most effective when used against the young, precisely where the "climate change" doctrine is preached.
Those of us who hold our doubts about so-called "human-induced climate change" are old enough to think critically about the matter, and expect the facts to bear out. Children, on the other hand, are taught from birth that they should respect authority figures and, particularly in public school, never to question the "experts." (If you don't already understand that this is by design, I encourage you to stop reading this article and immediately download a free copy of "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America
" by Charlot Iserbyt!)
If you get nonsense into their heads early enough, they will never question it. Especially if you can get immoral "experts" to lie
, fudge numbers
, and otherwise manipulate data for political purposes
. Of course, it is also necessary to demonize and vilify those who disagree, even if they are NASA scientists
and other actual climate scientists
, so you can pretend that there is an "overwhelming consensus
." See also here
For a former climate scientist's discussion on the effect of "climate catastrophe" on children, I recommend "Child prophets and proselytizers of climate catastrophe
" by Judith Curry.
Also note that there is never substantive media coverage of those scientists who oppose the agenda, even when they are among the IPCC itself:
"But two members of the committee, Peter Lilley (Conservative) and Graham Stringer (Labour), disagreed with the other nine. They accused their fellow MPs of not holding the IPCC critically to account.
“As scientists by training, we do not dispute the science of the greenhouse effect – nor did any of our witnesses,” they said in a statement.
“However, there remain great uncertainties about how much warming a given increase in greenhouse gases will cause, how much damage any temperature increase will cause and the best balance between adaptation to versus prevention of global warming.”
The two MPs say that the underlying technical report of the IPCC acknowledges many uncertainties, but these have been omitted from the critical Summary for Policymakers, presented to politicians." – Politicizing the IPCC report, by Judith Curry.
Next in the description you will notice that we must "leapfrog to more green, clean, resilient economies." If you remember the game of leapfrog, you will recall that each player must jump over the one in front of them. That is the UN's demand, as well. There is never a request for gradual change; it is always something that must be forced on everyone immediately.
This is followed by a call for "carbon neutrality," a ridiculous phrase if there ever was one. I point you to the essay, "Carbon is not the enemy
", by the journal Nature, as well as Dr. Judith Curry's discussion
of this and other essays on the topic.
We could go into much more discussion of this brief description, but the facts should be clear already: "climate change" is unscientific nonsense that is being force-fed to our children in order to be used by the United Nations as an excuse to take control of every facet of our lives.
See if you can identify the real agendas behind the buzzwords for this "thematic session":
"Join us for this Thematic Session if you care for matters such as: Low carbon pathways and per capita footprint; Transport and mobility transformation, Renewable energy, Fiscal incentives for green tech, Coastal communities, Climate-smart food production, Land use, land-change and forestry"
Among the list of speakers for this session are Jackie Biskupski, the lesbian Mayor of Salt Lake City, Selina Neirok Leem, a Youth Delegate from The Republic of the Marshall Islands, and Olumide Idowu, Co-Founder of a non-profit known as Climate Wednesday. We encourage you to visit the Climate Wednesday website
to see if you can identify the calls for global government intervention.
We leave you with this thought, for your consideration:
"Satan will take control of the world by claiming ownership of her resources." –Professor Hugh Nibley
And the United Nations will claim ownership by virtue of "saving the planet."