Image by ThankYouFantasyPictures from Pixabay
By Jo Nova
The stench of failure is written all over Cop30 in Brazil
The USA, China and India are not attending. The UN has said the 1.5 degrees target is no longer possible. And the OECD admits “policy commitments have fallen from 10% annual growth to just 1%.
The Consensus is not only dead, but no one can hide the body under the rug any longer. Things are decomposing so fast, even Keir Starmer has flown all the way to the COP conference in Brazil to say “the consensus is gone”.
Keir Starmer didn’t even want to go to COP30 lest he look like he’s in the palm of the globalist Blob which would feed his nemesis – Nigel Farage. So he’s put in a last minute appearance and gone out of his way to avoid the usual fire and brimstone devotion by uttering a blasphemy. The consensus, after all, was the holy grail. It was the reason “to believe” and a reason to act even if we didn’t believe. The Blob always said: “We don’t want to fall behind” like moving with the herd was a benefit in and of itself.
For a bunch of Groupthinkers, this is big admission:
[The Guardian] The UK prime minister told world leaders on Thursday at the Cop30 climate summit in Brazil that the “consensus is gone” on fighting climate change around the world, a decade after the landmark Paris agreement in 2015.
“Ten years ago, the world came together in Paris … united in our determination to tackle the climate crisis,” Starmer said. “The only question was how fast we could go. Today, however, sadly that consensus is gone.”
For Starmer, this might be the best escape route from the Net Zero bomb. As long as the fuse is lit and the carbon-clock is running, the globalist Blob parties face a wipe-out at the next election. But if “the consensus” is over, maybe he can pack the climate-talk away in a box for a few years and curb the fury over electricity prices. It’s what Mark Carney did to win in Canada. He scrapped the carbon tax on his first day in office and de-fanged the opposition. It may even placate the Groupthinking Greens, if he can convince them that no one else is acting and to wait for a better day.
Further to that, Starmer shocked everyone by pulling out of Brazil’s flagship policy. The Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) was supposed to raise $25b which has been downgraded to $10 billion this year to pay people to preserve forests, and the UK was expected to be one of the first contributors. Without $1b from the UK, it’s hard to see it succeeding at all.
Chris Bowen, the Australian Minister for Weather Control even agrees with Keir Starmer
But in renewable-crazy-land that just means that Australia has to do even more. The Guardian asked him about Keir Starmer’s words and he replied:
“I think that’s fair comment. Yes, it’s a contested space, but that makes supporting action in keeping with the science more important, not less important.
“It makes continued action by governments and industry who get it – that this is a scientific and environmental imperative, but also excellent economics – even more important. And that’s certainly our approach in Australia.”
Unlike the Reform Party in the UK, the opposition in Australia is a Lump of Jello, and doesn’t have a climate policy. So Chris Bowen is free to keep sprouting crazy witchery. He’s not afraid of the opposition because, effectively, there isn’t one.
Indeed, Bowen has to keep waving the flag, because the Australian government wants to host the next loser COP event this time next year. Thankfully, the opposition and the Nationals have both said “Let Turkey have it”. We want our billion dollars.
Even the OECD admits policy commitments have stalled. Globally, they only increased by 1% last year, when previously they would grow by 10% each year.
Global climate action losing momentum: OECD
By Ryann Cropp, The Australian Financial Review
The pace of global efforts to address climate change has ground to a halt, according to a report by the OECD that is likely to turbocharge Coalition wrangling over its commitment to emissions reduction.
The expansion of international climate policy commitments increased by just 1 per cent in 2024, with only 17.7 per cent of global emissions now covered by legally binding net zero pledges, according the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s annual Climate Action Monitor.
According to the OECD, the slowdown in climate commitments since 2021 contrasts significantly with the prior decade, when average emissions reduction policies expanded by about 10 per cent each year.
They have run out of excuses:
“This slowdown can no longer be explained by the COVID-19 pandemic or economic shocks: it reflects a loss of momentum in implementing effective policies,” the report said.
Even the UN agrees that we will fail to hit their 1.5 degrees magical target
It is, of course, our fault and we are moral failures:
The failure to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius is an emergency and nations must now “lead or be led to ruin”, UN secretary-general António Guterres has said as the COP30 climate conference got underway in Brazil’s rainforest city Belém.
He added: “Every fraction of a degree means more hunger, displacement and loss — especially for those least responsible. This is moral failure — and deadly negligence.”
Mr Guterres, being a Blob man and the total socialist, paints this as capitalist greed:
“Too many corporations are making record profits from climate devastation, with billions spent on lobbying, deceiving the public and obstructing progress,” he said. “Too many leaders remain captive to these entrenched interests.”
After all, it’s not like the consensus died because millions of people in the largest economy on Earth were not convinced and voluntarily voted (twice!) for a man who called Climate Change a con and a hoax. Oh no…
UPDATE: Just to clarify, the consensus Keir Starmer refers to is not “The Science consensus” (which is still sacred to socialists everywhere). He’s talking about the consensus for climate action, meaning political or economic moves. As long as “The Science” is still standing, this is just a pause in climate grifting. It’s never enough to win the economic arguments, we still have to beat down the bad-science monster.
Does Guterres even believe CAGW is a thing himself? Just trying to establish whether he’s evil or stupid.
630
Both!
500
He invented Global Boiling because he mistook 100F for 100C. That’s stupidity. But the press could not care. That’s complicity.
770
It is pretty obvious. Guterres is a grifter, just as all climate alarmists are. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/03/international-climate-aid-just-transition. Only 3% of the billions of $’s that this lot steal from us actually goes to the people who need it – and then only if you believe in the scam in the first place. Then they ask us for more money so they can build island beach side resorts and a romantic retreat in the Argentinian jungle. There’s no accounting. No one can show where all the money has gone. If the UNIPCC was a company, they would all be in jail for fraud. If I carried on like this with my company the NZ IRD would be exploring my every fundamental orifice before throwing me in jail. This is our money. We have the right to know where it is going and no one is willing to tell us because it would expose the lies and grift. THIS IS THE BIGGEST SCAM IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND AND MUST BE SHUT DOWN IMMEDIATELY. I will be writing to the NZ minister for climate change to ask for a full breakdown of where the money goes. I suggest we all do this in our own countries and don’t accept being fobbed off. If we all do this publicly we might just get the whole fraud exposed.
610
Bowen probably has a poster of Guterres on his office wall. They both have a penchant for making false statements. He says “Every fraction of a degree means more hunger, displacement and loss — especially for those least responsible. This is moral failure — and deadly negligence.”
Yet we find we are producing more food than ever…
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/the-world-is-producing-more-food-crops-than-ever-before/ar-AA1OgUig
If we diverted all the money being squandered on climate grifts into food redistribution, a lot less people would be going hungry. Yet the UN continue to blame climate change and countries not doing enough to try and achieve the unachievable.
330
This is indeed the biggest scam in a very long time, supplanting The Hole in the Ozone Layer.
But it won’t hold that position for long. The COVIDVAXX is coming.
All founded in public ignorance of science.
200
Same “gent” invented both scams. Was eventually charged with corruption and kicked out of the UN.
50
Good article, John, in that it lists a range of factors that have helped increase crop yields such as genetic modification of seeds, development of a process to capture nitrogen to make fertiliser and so on. But nowhere is it mentioned, in relation to bumper crops and the opposite, failed harvests leading to famine, the importance of temperature and the levels of CO2. There is no doubt that ,along with cold, the low levels of CO2 led to famine during the little ice age, and to current opposite of bumper and increasing crops over the last 50 years from slightly warmer temperatures and, vitally, increasing CO2.
50
‘ … evil or stupid.’
Arrogance and ignorance is a nasty mix.
270
It describes Chris Bowen to a T.
70
I would like to know how much taxpayer money was spent/wasted and how much “carbon” (sic) was generated by sending the Australian delegation of public serpents and politicians to this taxpayer-funded adventure holiday. Afterall, Brazil is not such a common destination for Australian vacationers.
510
The only circumstance under which this would be worthwhile is if they never came back because they decided to stay there.
360
Drop them, and all their baggage, in a favela in Sao Paulo.
150
Mariana Trench is adjacent and much deeper
150
Well, you’re close, you’re within 180 degrees of longitude.
100
The science does NOT support fantasies like the outcome of 1.5 deg C of “global warming”.
Here is a detailed study for Australia showing less than 1 deg C of warming for Australia since 1910.
The official claim from BOM is 1.51 +/- 0.32 deg C.
The official claim fails because it uses adjusted data and because you cannot use uncertainty estimates for temperatures that are guesses, not original measurements.
Geoff S
https://geoffstuff.com/halfwarm.docx
801
It is a wipeout because “no consensus”: not because The Science was wrong.
110
True, but the “no consensus” is because their science is wrong.
So I’ll happily accept the backdown.
50
I won’t! As long as they think “The Science” is right, it’s not a backdown, just a pause. They will be back.
But like you David, I’m happy to see the wheels fall off.
290
We have some good MPs in this country who decry ‘net zero’ but they do so on the basis of cost of energy and overall economic decline. If only a handful could master the scientific arguments that CO2 in the atmosphere does not control the weather but rather controls the abundance or decline in life on earth, then their moral position would be much stronger and would put pressure on the perpetrators of the scam.
150
Well Padre, there is always Senators Matt Canavan-Nats and Malcolm Roberts-ON
who have presented the climate science sceptical view with facts and graphs in
Senate reports to parliament as far back as 2015 on the shoddy science done in
the BoM and CSIRO, as well as in the Sky News media arena more recently.
However, not since Tony Abbott was PM have the Liberals stood up against the
climate consensus, even though the evidence for human caused climate change has
radically weakened since then, and all the Climate Council’s scary predictions,
especially from Ecologist Flannery, have been proved wrong.
Science showing the beneficial nature of both cyclic modern warming and rising CO2
for plant growth, has been studiously ignored by the IPCC and Australian institutions
to their utter shame, they have all been practicing political pseudo-science in this global
climate scam and it’s past time they were all exposed as liars and cheats.
If any of these entities were public companies, they would have gone broke, and their
leaders would be in jail now. It’s not too late to start legal proceedings, if we had money
the likes of which Bill Gates has thrown at `solving the climate crisis’ that isn’t.
20
And anyway there’s a new argument in town. According to The Conversation, in 2009 we faced 6ºC of warming and before Paris 4ºC. But now that’s down to 2.5ºC. They say: ‘This steady decline has happened because, contrary to popular belief, the world really is acting on climate change.’ https://theconversation.com/the-un-climate-summits-are-working-just-not-in-the-way-their-critics-think-268953
42
Of course it’s nonsense. But it’s an argument that cropping up elsewhere. Here’s a simple observation: if in the 6 years between 2009 and 2015, a period without UN ‘targets’ and government ‘pledges’, forecast emissions were reduced by 2ºC and in the 10 years between 2015, the year of the Paris Agreement, and today the forecast emissions were reduced by only 1.5ºC, surely that suggests that the Agreement, far from helping, has actually slowed the decline in emission reduction?
80
Con that makes no sense
30
I am always amazed that the BoM can only give temperatures from 1910, thus removing the inconvenience of the Federation Drought. But the records before 1910 are included in the global records.
330
Temperature is not everything, BoM put this up.
https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/gdj3.19
40
Years ago you could access the earlier records through BOM. I think in the Naughties you could bring up a map of Oz in the 1890’s showing departures from “normal” temp, and it looked about the sae as we did in the 2000’s. We couldn’t have that now, could we?
10
And there goes another one billion dollars of taxpayer money.
COP30 is a failure as will be COP31 in Adelaide, Australia, if we can bribe Turkey enough not to host it.
Why does Australia always pick losers?
The Government thinks Australia is showing “leadership” but all its doing is showcasing their (and Australia’s) idiocy.
530
What odds are the bookies offering on no COP 31?
190
Why would the UN say No to Australia? I just don’t see it. Are there Globalist points to be made with Turkey?
121
No , it’s just that the President’s wife rules the roost in their household and she wants it, or else. Bit like old Boris’s latest squeeze. That why we ended up with Glasgow. (Going back to the city of my birth to catch up with family, next year. I’ll have a stern word!)
10
Well, it’s certainly the last chance for anyone to host a COP before they are disbanded
as a total waste of time, space and the fifth dimension-money.
Perhaps an alien comedy channel will pick up the tab for serialization!
10
What we need now is another massive power failure. It would be the icing on the cake and bring the illusion into perspective/reality!
“Chris Bowen, the Australian Minister for Weather and social Control in this renewable-crazy-land just means that Australia has to do even more”.
210
With SA and renewables so called, and interconnector to VIC where peak demand periods are often periods of compensation paid to major electricity users by state government to stop operating what could go wrong?
Would the diesel-gas turbine generators in the old GMH factory in the Adelaide suburb of Elizabeth generate enough electricity? Maybe the diesel generators recently installed for submarine construction?
90
Bowen wants this to be in Adelaide so as to improve his chances of a perk UN position after he is booted out for destroying the country.
190
Mark Carney didn’t exactly scrap the air tax in Canada.
He lowered the consumer rate to zero, but the act that created it in the first place can only be repealed by a vote in Parliament – which has not happened.
As things stand, Carney is doubling down on an indutry emissions tax. That way, when the extra expdnse is passed on to the consumers, he can blame “greedy oil companies” for the price increase.
160
Thank you MMfromCanada. We really do appreciate the local details. They all use the same tricks…
60
How would Adelaide handle 10s of thousands of delegates to anything? This sounds like a nonsense fantasy.
140
And note the UN demands for only the best accommodation standard for delegates, fine dining with the best of food and choices, entertainment (in Brazil right now Kylie Minogue is one of the star attractions), VVIP treatment generally.
100
Unless you’re from a poor country. Africans had a WhatsApp group at last year’s COP OUT detailing where you could find free food. Bowen and Co weren’t going hungry.
https://www.climatedepot.com/2024/11/26/cop29-the-famished-freeloaders-of-baku/
10
A few minutes of searching reveals:
Number of attendees COP30 = 50,000
Number of hotel rooms in Adelaide , approx 10,000 (a nd many will not be lavish enough for climate celebs)
This is no small matter and one not resolvable in 12 months , from a standing start.
Perhaps guests can FIFO from Sydney and Melbourne? Fully offset of course.
150
Yes, Adelaide can’t do it, so it has to go to Melbourne.
They deserve it more, and no one will notice the extra $Billion costs.
Perhaps Lily the consummate climate/energy liar minister could do a
song and dance routine with partner Blackout Bowen, after all they deserve each other.
10
Australia does not pick losers but the politicians we elect do. There are many Australians who are big winners and who scored big all by themselves. CSL, BHP, Gina, Fortesque (when Twiggy was still sane), numerous Nobel Prize winners, lots of sports stars, film makers and inventors, business owners and entrepreneurs. The failures were all government sponsored. Snowy 2, hydrogen projects (all of them), Mabo, sit down money, lax laws, cheap trains that are too wide, cheap ferries that are too high, divisive policies, too many public servants, less service, the list goes on but governments are to blame, not Australia.
30
It was only ever a consensus among those that agreed with the consensus.
I agree with the consensus that there was no consensus.
I may have colluded with those outside the consensus.
I was not hesitant to do so.
I have a history of being hesitant about consensus.
I have an inner mandate against consensus.
But I never insurrect, I only rebel.
Against consensus.
I would also like a refund.
410
Did Herr Starmer give the COP30 drones an update on his megalomaniacal geoengineering sun-dimming experiments?
“Cheap” at “only” £57m (US$76m) of taxpayer money.
And includes cloud brightening above Australia’s Great Barrier Reef. I hope no Aussie taxpayer money will be spent on that, but no doubt it will be. (Jo has previously reported but I can’t find the link but see https://policybrief.anu.edu.au/marine-cloud-brightening-great-barrier-reef/ ).
200
That makes perfect sense in the UK. Build an enormous amount of solar farms in one of the most unsuitable places on the planet for that form of energy then seek to develop a program that will block sunlight.
210
There has to be an Australian in the project team, the Poms couldnt be that stupid without help.
160
Not to mention Honk, that “consensus”, is not A scientific position/fact/replicable. It is in fact a lazy agreement as those within the “consensus, or those that claim the science of “consensus”, have not looked at all the scientific variables of weather/climate.
231
Plus s scientific fact is not established by “consensus” as the anti-science Left endlessly repeat.
That’s not how science and the scientific method works. “One Hundred Authors Against Einstein” was published in 1931 denouncing Einstein’s work. When asked to comment on this denunciation of relativity by so many scientists, Einstein replied that to defeat relativity one did not need the word of 100 scientists, just one fact.
The “consensus” opinion is not necessarily correct and has no scientific validity.
Scientific fact is not established by consensus, it never has been, real science never will be.
361
And I hate to mention it, but the consensus Starmer talks about is the consensus for climate action. He’s not talking about “The Science”.
It is merely a policy-consensus or an economic-consensus that he refers too.
141
I understand Jo but the policy consensus wouldn’t exist unless they had first established the lie of “scientific consensus”.
41
David I’me sure you know-Consensus is just a political term for agreement of like-minded people.
It’s nothing to do with science.
10
“It is merely a policy-consensus or an economic-consensus that he refers too.”
Yes Grasshopper.
It may time for you to carry the hot hibachi into the snow.
Of which there will be plenty.
The very flip that turned ‘Science’ into the New Religion.
And is bringing about its’ own collapse.
Even to the point of forcing a resurgence of the old.
‘Science’ got turned into ‘policy’.
With a mandate to follow it.
Climate Change turned science into a Crusade and Jihad.
They didn’t erect a new Big Ben in Mecca for nothing.
All the pretty girls fly to Abu Dhabi.
11
Most of the attendees come for the cash. There isn’t any. Climate reparations?
Apparently the US has appealed the UN demand for their own $42Billion tax on world shipping with bunker oil. The UN is not a government. It is an endless line of powerless committees run by retired politicians and public servants, totalling 80,000 employees and contractors. Trump says he will reform it. Not before time.
500
And now Victoriastan has or soon will have a new secondary “Parliament” I fully expect substantial “climate reparations” to be paid as tribute to the beneficiaries of that new anti-democratic scam.
290
UN is the head of an octopus with many tentacles forming many bureaucratic organisations
140
When the founder and now former leader of The Australian Greens, Bob Brown, delivered his last address to the National Press Club luncheon as leader he explained his “dream” is for a “world parliament” and no international borders between countries.
Isn’t that the objective of the far-left of politics and why they manipulated to control the UN soon after it was established?
Why Australian Labor Attorney General (Communist conmrade) gave the UN advice that treaties and agreements must be signed with member nations, as many as possible covering all areas of governance, and for those nations to legislate into law and create regulations to enforce UN compliance.
160
Australia’s new CDC is designed to give absolute power over Australia to the WHO (or whoever China picks). One person, the Director-General, has absolute power including the power to enter into agreements with foreign entities, and their decisions cannot be reviewed or challenged, not even in a court of law. Even worse, they are exempt from FOI. It’s all in the Act passed by both houses. We have a globalist (ie, pro Chinese anti-Australian) government, we don’t have an opposition, and we don’t have a functioning media.
I thought a while ago that there would be a limit to how far Australia could sink. I was wrong.
100
Some of the attendees are fossil fuel employees on a junket.
‘More than 5,000 fossil fuel lobbyists were given access to the UN climate summits over the past four years, a period marked by a rise in catastrophic extreme weather, inadequate climate action and record oil and gas expansion, new research reveals.’ (Guardian)
21
Oh no, it’s not an emergency!!
Minister Bowen, stop wasting our money.
170
When this hoax was invented by innumerate footballer and tobacco heir Al Gore and James Hansen head of the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, it was given credibility by the United Nations. And Al Gore who nearly made it to US President, except for a few chads in Florida. His timing was perfect. As society became richer, newly created environmentalists agreed instantly the sky was truly falling. And then the UFO tinfoil hat brigade just loved ‘THE’ Science. It was the Climate Rapture. We are all going to die, very soon, for certain. That was 30th June 1988. And the IPCC was born. It’s object was to raise money.
Why did anyone believe it? A perfect storm of the voice of authority, the cash, the political advantage with the new Green movements taken over by the communists and more cash.
Real scientists objected strongly and then hoped it would just go away. They went back to work. And new scientists appeared, Climate Scientists who argued that Climates had nothing to do with the weather. So meteorologists and even geologists were written out of the script.
But first you had to believe humans control how much CO2 is in the air. And then that CO2 dramatically controlled world temperature. So the 50% growth in the last 250 years was super significant. The oceans were going to rise suddenly and great storms and lighting would devastate the world in an End of Days event as we reached a magic ‘tipping point’. Coming soon. 37 years ago!
So now we Australians have a Minister for Climate. I still find the stupidity of this beyond belief. But at COP30 we have a new world champion of both, our very own Minister for the Climate Rapture.
A steadfast believer, Bowen is our very own Horatius on the bridge, saving the entire world no matter how many Australians have to suffer terribly for his convictions. Doing to Australia what military dictator and drug cartel leader Maduro has done to Venezuela. Or a century of dictators have done to Argentina. And the Liberal Party of Australia has gone the way of the Tories, led by more true Climate Change believers chasing the Green vote. Unless they too are completely mad and not just bad.
As for President Guterres, the WHO was the organization which declared the Wuhan Flu was a natural mutation and ‘not infectious, human to human’. How many millions then died because of the UN?
420
After Bowen has covered Australia in Chinese solar arrays & wind turbines, and the floods still occur, the droughts till scorch the soils, the hurricanes still blow down suburbs — what then?
10
The real issue is not why “consensus” is gone, but why it ever existed in the first place.
That’s not how science is done.
And how many trillions of taxpayer money of cost and lost productivity, progress and lowered standard of living have been caused by this anti-science insanity?
The only ones that have increased their standard of living are 1) the subsidy harvesting Elites and 2) the Chicomms, an advanced industrial nation who are inexplicably exempt from emissions restrictions.
270
It was an invention by Al Gore, and he invented it because he was not capable of arguing “The Science.”
131
Again, why can’t these liars and con merchants spend 5 minutes online and check the data?
The annual co2 emissions increase and trajectory for the world hasn’t changed for 80 years or since 1945.
What don’t they understand about the clear evidence from OWI Data?
The OECD annual co2 emissions are lower today than in 1988 or 37 years ago. So what’s blackout Bowen’s
problem, or can’t he understand very simple data and very simple graphs?
In fact the NON OECD co2 emissions trajectory is unchanged since 1950 or the last 75 years.
China and India and the NON OECD countries want a more prosperous future using BASELOAD coal, Gas and Nuclear. They couldn’t care less about the posturing liars and con merchants in the Brazil rainforest.
So why are we refusing to use cheap, reliable Coal, Gas and Nuclear and turn that guaranteed energy SECURITY into our NATIONAL SECURITY?
Why can’t they spend just 5 minutes online and look up the evidence from OWI Data and finally wake up?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country?country=OWID_WRL~OECD+%28GCP%29~Non-OECD+%28GCP%29~AUS
200
You have answered your own question. They can’t check the data because they are liars and con merchants. If they were honorable and conscientious, none of this would be happening.
180
Why do you imagine they want data? The scam has been running quite well and if solar and wind had even been half as good as promised, it would still be running well. They could have papered over the rest. Then Trump stirred up the peasants and here we are, having to run the “lack of concensus” story to have an ordely exit and load the costs onto the peasants.
70
The only reason that the whole fraudulent, unscientific enterprise has lasted as long as it has is that many corporations are making record profits from climate terror. To aid this harvest, they spend fortunes on lobbying, lying to the public and hiding the truth. Politicians are only too keen to get their share of the flood of money going past.
290
Of course they’re serving meat Paul. Why would you go to a climate crisis conference if it were not for the fine dining, luxury accommodation, exotic locations, business and government networking opportunities to harvest subsidies and luxury transport options including private jet?
180
He must have naively thought it was actually about the (misguided concern for the) climate, not the opportunities and taxpayer funded fun.
220
Did he also the ACTUAL damage to the Amazon Rainforest?
The bit about that 40 km demolished to let the guests land their private jets and transport (by limousine) to the COP village.
170
Yesterday I viewed a documentary on the Amazon Rainforest and that during the past 8,000 years there were before Europeans arrived and spread diseases that killed most of the indigenous population there were many quite large settlements or cities and towns, agriculture, roads.
Lidar operated from drones have discovered many of the settlements and some are being excavated and researched.
The Rainforest is therefore regrowth.
Australia was once covered by Rainforest until, I understand, about 120.000 years ago when the climate zone gradually changed to warmer and drier and Eucalypts took over, today leaving about 3 percent of Rainforest.
80
Come together, right now- eat some meat 🎶
50
Can anyone tell us what climate emergency the yappers are howling about?
Again, the global population has soared since 1950 (just 2.5 billion) and now 8.2 billion in 2025.
We are much healthier and wealthier today and average life expectancy in 1950 was just 55.3 years and today 73.5 years. So when will the UN check their data and THINK?
Don’t they realise that today we live in the safest world in Human history? Why can’t they just look up their own UN data from Macrotrends?
Why does the UN insist we WASTE more TRILLIONs of $ on their CC BS and rubbish and why does the UN always IGNORE their own data?
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/wld/world/population
190
Consider how African life expectancy and population has boomed since 1950 and yet the CC liars and con merchants choose to ignore the UN data about the world’s poorest continent.
Life expectancy was just 36 years in 1950 but today is 64.6 years and population has soared from 227 million in 1950 to 1530 million in 2025 or an increase of 1303 million in just the last 75 years.
What don’t the UN liars and con merchants understand about this greatest Human flourishing in the history of the world?
Their calories per capita have improved over the last 75 years, so why do they continue to lie and also insist we WASTE endless TRILLIONs of $ on the greatest con trick in the history of our world?
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/afr/africa/population
150
Strewth Joanne you need to change all Kier to Keir; maybe it is the Two Tier Keir slogan has brought you undone.
130
Thank you Gob. Fixed. At least I only got it wrong 5 times. Gawd.
140
More data that easily proves that we are being conned by liars and donkeys from the UN and many near treasonous OECD countries today.
In 1900 the average life expectancy was just 32 years and population then was about 1.6 billion.
In 2025 the average life expectancy is about 73.5 years and population now about 8.2 billion.
But the kicker is that African life expectancy in 1900 was under 30 years and yet 36 years by 1950 and 64.6 years today in 2025.
African population in 1900 was about 100 million, then 227 million by 1950 and 1530 million today.
Africa has soared past the global life expectancy of 32 years in 1900 and even in 1950 (55.3 years) and Africa has increased to 64.6 years in 2025.
And this African flourishing has taken place in just the last 125 years.
So where is the UN’s so called dangerous CC, because their own published data proves they are feeding us a load of BS and nonsense?
140
Meanwhile, in Caro Land:
40
COP 31 to cost $1 Billion? Really?
That’s 1,000 Million dollars!
How does anyone manage to spend that amount of money on a conference?
These hangers-on really know how to waste money.
Haven’t they heard of teleconferencing?
140
The Government doesn’t care about the cost, they just make up an amount they “think” it will cost, and public serpents and politicians who have never had proper jobs just sign off on whatever inflated quotes given to them by contractors, probably with preference given to DEI contractors.
70
I asked Gulag AI:
how much does it cost to run a conference per person per day in australia
Answer:
COP31
Cost $1,000,000,000 Ref: https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/cop-that-1b-bill-to-host-un-climate-summit-20251104-p5n7it
30,000 drones attending. The Australian Government has limited it to that.
Ref: https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/labor-plans-to-slash-numbers-for-un-climate-summit-20250910-p5mtxg
Duration 12 days if same as COP30.
That’s $33,333 per drone or $2,777 per day each attendee. That compares to the $320 to $500+ per day suggested by Gulag AI if accommodation is provided, but at COP conferences particpants pay for their own accommodation (or rather the taxpayer does) so then it would be the typical daily rate of $180-$220 per person. The drones or their taxpayers also pay for travel.
Obviously someone will be making A LOT of money out of COP31.
A COP conference is just as much of a scam as the “renewables” it promotes.
Now, the above calculation and research is very simple.
Why are the fake conservative Liberals and Lamestream Media silent?
170
Thanks David.
It’s a staggering waste of money.
As you stated, someone is making a lot of money out of this.
As for the Libs and the media?…Pfffft!
130
Climate Change politics and wealth creation
40
David, have you included the “Laundry” bill?
20
I asked Gulag:
how much did Australian participation at cop30 cost
It gave the answer for COP29 as I guess COP30 figures are not yet available as the conference is still running.
COP29 was 14 days. I love to travel and can easily do 14 days accommodation and flights for far less than that. Also, don’t forget COP conferences are free to attend (if you are invited).
Remember, these are public serpents and politicians spending our hard-earned money.
And they don’t care how much they spend.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/15m-taxpayer-bill-for-75-public-servants-to-attend-un-climate-change-summit/news-story/8a6b1ea07dbe982c480004b534426030?amp=
120
A billion dollars and just 12 months to spend it in. Thats gonna take a lot of snouts, and a lot of troughs
110
Don’t worry.
Australia is full of them.
90
All to fulfil Simpleton Bowen’s ego and provide a networking environment for climate scam subsidy harvesters.
Hopefully COP31 will be the last of these scam conferences and ideally COP31 itself won’t go ahead but that’s unlikely to happen.
Afterall, a billion dollars and many snouts in the trough. And it is Australia…
90
Brace your self Yarpos for a solar farm coming close to you soon! Maybe all of us “oldies” can get a job for a while to help cover the cost of our electricity bills. If we worked on site we could smuggle some electrons out in our Gladstone bags.
50
‘The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has announced this year would likely be the second- or third-warmest on record, with the temperature average through August being 1.42 C above the pre-industrial average, after record heat in 2023 and 2024.’ (ABC)
The record heat in 2023 and 2024 was caused by the Hunga Tonga effect, a greenhouse gas in the Stratosphere.
62
Since records began …..
Isn’t that about 140 years?
And electronic under 50 years?
70
It makes no sense to argue that there is a problem because we’re above the pre-industrial average, because by definition about a half of all the pre-industrial era would have been above the average. It can only be a problem if we’re above the pre-industrial maximum, and then only if certain other conditions are met. But we aren’t above the pre-industrial maximum, in fact last time I looked we were below the temperatures of 99% of all pre-industrial years (4.5b of them). IOW we are in the lowest decile of all Earth time. It’s time we got real.
60
In Melbournistan we’re well on the way to the hottest November eeeevvvveerrr.
/sarc
Currently 10.8C according to my weather station. 220pm.
110
The heat where I live comes in short waves.
50
Also on my outside analog thermometer at arond 3 pm: 10 C
Getting my back wet and frozen trying to fix the ducted gas heater as without it we were shivering inside – 2 reverse aircons could not do the job.
Finally replaced the sensor and got it to work – what a blessing again in the comfort of warm rooms all around.
Why oh why do we have to give up on these tremendous advances in civilisation???
60
Ah, the fear of losing control of the narrative!
Marxists like Starmer are now squirming ONLY because there’s a credible opposition. With a Uniparty swamp in Canberra the sanctimonious arrogance of Consensus Chris can continue unabated.
The Nationals need candidates in metro as well as country now to truly be the opposition to the grifters like Forrest, their political useful idiots and the propaganda financiers like Holmes aCourt & Cannon-Brooks.
Nobody does hypocrisy like the hard left, but we need laser focussed targetted opposition now before the absurdity of US – the taxpayer – pays $1bn plus for grifters to fly their private jets from Europe & Canada and frequent flyer plane loads of free loading bureaucrats from the UN, EU and Marxist run countries to browbeat single flight holidaymakers as planet killers.
All for an ego boost to the most incompetent government since Whitlam bankrupted a rich vibrant sovereign nation, with hatred, loathing and citizens money.
Keep the blowtorch of facts going Jo, it’s important to the majority of Australians, even the apathetic and those in agriculture who feel they have no choice now but to take taxpayer funded bribes to destroy productive land which fed 100m people, but is rapidly disappearing.
I asked my National member the other day to encourage her colleagues to bombard the Solar panel Minister and frequent flyer PM in question without notice times with the same questions every time. What is the total Hectares removed from feeding the 100m we were feeding? Where can the public find the ‘regularly updated’ reduction monthly? What has been the exact negative effect to our agricultural balance of payments? What is the projected financial losses from Agriculture reduction to the Australian economy for the remainder of this government term? How much of indigenous land has been used? How much have land councils been paid? How much of them were ‘compulsorily acquired? How many ‘cultural sensitivity’ issues were overcome with increased funds?
We all must demand our Federal representatives pose these questions. At the very least, even if they don’t ask, it will prove to the conservative and independent members of Parliament in both Houses how little they actually know about the topic, how little they’ve actually questioned the consensus with questions which concern voters and how much they’ve just accepted as they ‘are very busy daily’ in a swamp where minutiae dominates to hide the truly important facts which voters put them there to address!
The ridiculous comment from Liberal Dan Tehan that they won’t have a decision on net zero ’til 2026 shows how pathetic the Liberals are under 3S astrological Ley. Seriously, it’s going to take you until next year to work out what YOU believe in? What YOUR core values are?
Move aside you bedwetters. A true conservative party is needed right now and as the American voter showed despite a plethora of character assassination propaganda, they were looking for a candidate who never wavered from his core values, simple sovereign nation based policies which had the voter/citizens/ workers at its core.
Who will that be in Australia? Come on Nats, raid the Libs of Hastie, Antic, Price, Henderson, Patterson set up a true National Party and get this country back on track with affordable base load energy to encourage agriculture, industry and technology to thrive.
160
With any luck, maybe there won’t be a COP31. It is not welcome in Adelaide – pity us if we get 20,000 international grifters thronging our city. The only ones to gain will be the bars, the escort agencies and the casino.
20
Some of us call him Der Sturmer.
10
All the best engineering and science was done by consensus (Sark off)
Mother nature and father economics were never on their side, nor were 99% of the global population. It was always a tiny group of very rich people from rich countries who wanted EVERYONE ELSE to suffer for their politicised utopian idea.
00
with billions spent on lobbying, deceiving the public and obstructing progress,
Hmm…this isn’t the corporations but surely Guterres’s Green Blob at work.
00
Don’t kid yourself, Carney is still a full on believer, he is just enough of a snake to try to hide it. Canada’s economy has been the worst in the G20 for the past decade and it is going to get significantly worse.
00
DOUBLE DOWN SIR KEIR!! The consensus may be gone, but that’s the trigger for TWICE THE POVERTY, TWICE THE PROPAGANDA!
10
“
What the slow down reflects is that nations still interested in prosperity have realised that it’s all a scam. These countries have slowed down and, in some cases, stopped implementing policies that simply destroy their economies…except Bowen of course, he’s still a committed disciple of the Church of Climate.
00