Climate Summit: Crusade Against Un-cooked Danish Draft Report and ‘Climategate’

Climate Summit:
Crusade Against Un-cooked Danish Draft Report and ‘Climategate’

(Madan Menon Thottasseri)
_____________________________________________________________

The G-77 group of countries and China on Wednesday December 09, 2009 blasted a Danish draft proposal that threatens the success of reaching an agreement on climate change in the ongoing Copenhagen summit.

Sudan's Lumumba Stanislas Dia Ping, who heads the G-77 group stated that draft text, which was leaked, is a "serious and unfortunate development. It is a major violation that threatens the success of the Copenhagen negotiating process,". The G-77 and China called on the Prime Minister of Denmark, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, and protested for releasing a pre-summit draft, an uncooked report and deviate from such further attempts planned for. The group reaffirmed that it will not walk out of Copenhagen and will indefatigably work towards an unbiased outcome till the last minutes of the conference.

The G77 held the host of the Copenhagen negotiations, Rasmussen personally responsible for the production of the document, stating that it is "very unfortunate that the man trusted to lead the process will fail”

UN climate change chief Yvo de Boer said this draft was on a ‘decision paper’ put forward by Danish Prime Minister. He said "This was an informal paper ahead of the conference given to a number of people for the purposes of consultations. The only formal texts in the UN process are the ones tabled by the Chairs of this Copenhagen conference at the behest of the Parties," he added.

G77 member states cannot afford a failure at Copenhagen wherein Negotiators from 192countries have come to hammer out a climate change treaty as the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012.

In the meantime, hackers had gained access to the documents of the climate research centre of UK-based East Anglia University and leaked confidential data, including thousands of emails and documents between UK and US scientists over the past 10 years which have led to accusations that scientists exaggerated the crisis.

Some of the excerpts of the e-mails posted read, "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline." Another e-mail reads: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."

A major threat has emerged out from United States, when the Sarah Palin the 2008 Republican nominee for vice president and governor of Alaska from 2006 to 2009 refurbished criticisms against the summit with the support of these fresh rumours. His contention is that these e-mails revealed leading climate experts’ deliberately destroying records, manipulated data to "hide the decline" in global temperatures, and tried to silence their critics by preventing them from publishing in peer-reviewed journals. There were incidences which established that there existed wast differences of opinions, ideas and research observations and never had consensus within the CRU personnel! Many had strong doubts about the accuracy of estimates of temperatures from centuries ago, estimates used to back claims that more recent temperatures are rising at an alarming rate.

Sarah Palin believes that the scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in Copenhagen. He thinks that the policy should be based on sound science, not politics. He cited his experience as Governor of Alaska, when he took the stand against politicized science against which he sued the federal government over the decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species despite the fact that the polar bear population had more than doubled then. He was widely criticized and got bashed for his efforts by radical environmentalists in United States. Still he stood by my view that adding a healthy species to the endangered list under the guise of "climate change impacts" was an abuse of the Endangered Species Act. This would have irreversibly hurt both Alaska's economy and the nation's, while also reducing opportunities for responsible development.

He wanted U.S diplomats and Officials Copenhagen should remember that good environmental policymaking is about weighing real-world costs and benefits -- not pursuing a political agenda. In the meantime he asserted that he is not unaware on the global warming and the reality of changing climate. He proudly remembers his achievement as one of the first governors to create a sub-committee to deal specifically with the issue of changing weather patterns and to recommend common-sense policies to respond to the coastal erosion, thawing permafrost and retreating sea ice that affect Alaska's communities and infrastructure.

He says that while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical environmental trends, we can't say with assurance that man's activities cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs. And those costs are real. Unlike the proposals China and India offered prior to Copenhagen which actually allow to increase emissions, President Barack Obama’s proposal calls for very serious cut of long-term carbon emissions. Meeting such targets would require Congress to pass its cap-and-tax plans, which will result in job losses and higher energy costs as admitted by the President during his campaign.

Sarah Palin commented that Americans are not hoping for the cap-and-tax plans.The public opposition mounting to stall Congress's legislation, Environmental Protection Agency bureaucrats plan to regulate carbon emission themselves doing an end run around the American people. He wanted U.S people to know on the plight of European Union, where energy prices skyrocketed after it began a cap-and-tax program. Meanwhile, Australia's Parliament recently defeated a cap-and-tax bill. Surely other nations have to follow suit, particularly as the climate e-mail scandal continues to unfold.

He attacked Obama for opting to reach Copenhagenon the final day of the summit, stating that the the deal Obama gets will be no deal for American people.He wanted the president to stay back in home by sending a message stating that the U.S cannot be apartyto fraudulent scientific practices! His advise to the U.S regime was clear, when he said “Without trustworthy science and with so much at stake, Americans should be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference. The president should boycott Copenhagen

Saudi Arabia's negotiator Mohammed Al-Sabban had stated that climate science had been "shaken" by the leaked e-mails. Reacting to this statement, Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Rajendra Pachauri said "Wouldn't you expect that? Oil and politics mix very well. I'm not too sure that oil and science mixes very well." The UN Climate Change Chief noted that incident was not a source of friction at the talks. "I think the science produced by the IPCC is rock-solid."

ajendra Pachauri along with fellow scientists stood up for their colleagues allegedly involved in the 'Climategate' scandal, stating that they had been "unfairly targeted."
The persons who have worked on this report, and those who unfortunately have been victims of this terrible and illegal act, are outstanding scientists, and have contributed enormously over the 20, 21 years of the existence of the IPCC, Now they are being very unfairly targeted. The only issue that has to be dealt with as far as this occurrence is concerned is to find out who is behind it .

In his opening statement at the UN Copenhagen conference on Monday, the head of IPCC called the incident as an "illegal act" done by those who continued to deny the existence of climate change. At a news conference yesterday, Pachauri restated this position stating that the act had been timed to interfere with Copenhagen conference and called for an investigation as well.
Defending the integrity and veracity of the IPCC and its report in the strongest terms, Pachauri noted that "barring a few isolated voices, people over here are totally convinced of the solidity of the findings in the IPCC report."

The US Deputy Special Envoy for Climate Change, Jonathan Pershing, had already criticised the media for blowing the controversy out of proportion and maligning scientists involved in this episode.

He remarked that the science is incredibly robust and in fact as all nations looked forward and he is worried much more about not acting urgently than will ultimately be a small blip on the history of this process.

I suspect that Republican leaders and Anti-Obama factor plays a role behind the screen at Copenhagen.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~