The party season has started. In about a month, Rio will be crowded by politicians and hooligans for the mega environmental gathering, but allready next week, good old Hotel Maritim in Bonn will fill up with the usual bunch for yet another climate conference.

Nothing wrong with Bonn, or Maritim for that matter, but don’t people get bored? From the UNFCCC invitation:

“The 36th sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) and of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), the fifteenth session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action…”.

That’s just for starters, but it seems like the same show again. 36th session! And over the past decade, when these meeting have intentsified, there has been no significant global warming, and certainly not any man made climate change. Should be pointed out, to avoid misunderstandings, that we have indeed seen tradegies that could fit into the environment chategory, Tsunamis, earthquaqes, starvation and war, but none of these are adressed neither under the roof of Maritim. Or by the usual Tibetan vegans traditionally entertaining visitors outside.

And you easily start getting the feeling that even the organizers are feeling that this is just business as usual. After all, some years have passed since the global hysteria in Copenhagen, a bunch of climate gates for example (though the first erupted right before the meeting), and things that people in general really do care about. Some wars, economic crisis in Europe, a couple of elections, to mention a few.

But Bonn is nice, and though even the lunch burger at Maritim is rather tasty, I would rather recommend some really nice restaurants to enjoy after a stroll along the Rhine.

Wiser from the Copenhagen hysteria, all sides – except President Zuma, who is forced to show some enthusiasm, and in a way The Holy Father, who wants a “credible” outcome (nothing wrong with credibility) - seem to agree that COP17 in Durban wont accomplish anything. As for me, I’m content with that, but it’s still fun to watch the show, including side appaerances from all places. Guess we can look forward to a lot of that.

In the UK, PM Cameron’s “Green Guru”, Steve Hilton suddenly comes out as a realist, saying he doubts the entire Global Warming idea.

Reports the Daily Mail:

‘I’m not sure I believe in it,’ he announced at a meeting of the Energy Department, prompting one aide to blurt out: ‘Did I just hear that correctly?’

Meanwhile, Canada seems to abandon ship as far as Kyoto goes.

“[Environment Minister, Peter] Kent said in the House of Commons on Nov. 22 he won’t sign a document at the Durban conference that extends the Kyoto targets.

‘Canada goes to Durban with a number of countries sharing the same objective, and that is to put Kyoto behind us,’ Kent said.” according to CTV News.

And this is just the beginning. Roughly, on the table is: Kyoto, expiring next year. The EU, not having any problems with the obligations, are for an extension, and the big players never joined. A global binding treaty that was hoped for in Copenhagen and now, if ever, might appear at least as a draft resolution in three years.

Remains the 100 billions, pledged, but still unclear how, to be spread over the earth. This is COP17. Guess the by now professional summit globerotters find that a fair sum for others to pay, in order to continue the circus.

Last Tuesday, University of Leipzig science faculty dean Prof. Dr. Jürgen Haase barred a climate seminar organized by (his own) geography professor Werner Kirstein, as well as the use of an auditorium of his own institute (!) and participation by European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) Vice President Michael Limburg as one of the the main speakers. Fortunately the ban was later relaxed and the seminar was allowed to go ahead.

The reason for originally having banned the seminar was a dissertation authored by Michael Limburg, which was critical of climate-science and was submitted to the faculty in March 2010. Two reviewers rejected the dissertation claiming, among other points, that it was inadequate. This is why Limburg was not welcome as a speaker, according to a letter from the Dean. The fact that the same dissertation had been recommended for acceptance by 4 other renowned professors went unmentioned by Haase. Limburg immediately challenged the ban.

What was so inconvenient about Limburg’s dissertation?

Under the supervision of Prof. Werner Kirstein, Limburg had written a dissertation that examined the quality of historical global temperature and sea level data in detail. His conclusions were damning. Using accepted rules for science and measurement, Limburg’s results showed that the datasets did not allow sea level and temperature change over the last 120-150 years to be determined anywhere near the alleged accuracies of millimetres or tenths of a degree Celsius respectively as claimed by the IPCC. The range of uncertainty, in both global mean temperature and sea level, is considerably greater than the total respective changes given by the IPCC. Every factor in attributing the possible causes of the changes was, at best, scientifically questionable.

Naturally, the faculty searched – and found – the “right” reviewers for assessing Limburg’s dissertation. In his decision to ban Limburg from speaking, Haase quoted only the objectively unfair and negative assessments. The fact that four other university professors had recommended the dissertation be accepted got no mention by Haase. Limburg officially contested the assessment delivered by the two reviewers, but they have taken their time to respond. Up to today there is still no response. Now a legal battle appears inevitable. Science has again been cast aside.

The high point of the whole affair is the open attempt by the University of Leipzig to silence Lim¬burg – even though he had been officially invited by a full professor. The Leipzig University faculty appears to be completely oblivious to this unworthy conduct.

Open debate is essential for the progress of science

This brings up Voltaire, the most famous philosopher of our time, and his words to his harshest opponent: ‘Sir, I do not agree with your opinion and I fully oppose you. But I would give up my life to assure that you will always be allowed to publicly express your opinion’. At the University of Leipzig, there has to be some colleagues among the philosophy faculty who are familiar with those words. But it looks as if the University leadership is not among them.

Sources: Press release by EIKE, www.eike-klima-energie.eu, originally translated from German by Pierre Gosselin, http://notrickszone.com

DAVID ROTHBARD & CRAIG RUCKER - The Washington Times

As the United Nations wrapped up its recent climate conference in Bonn, talks organizer Christiana Figueres proclaimed that climate change is the “the most important negotiation the world has ever faced.” Faced with real problems – financial meltdowns, unemployment, war and genuine human suffering – the world no longer agrees.

It’s a good thing human productivity doesn’t threaten the global thermostat the way the U.N. would have us believe. If it did, we’d be cooked. Countries rich and poor are backing away from commitments they made years ago during rosier economic times, before the public became aware of Climategate, renewable energy costs and genuine debate.

The Kyoto Protocol, the only binding international agreement signed since the global warming scare began, expires after 2012. Canada, Russia and Japan have declared they will not renew; China and the United States never signed it, and the U.S. has made it plain it is not about to. And poor countries are becoming less enamored about signing on, as they realize hard economic times mean there will be little climate “mitigation” and “restitution” money coming their way from (formerly) rich countries.

Even die-hard warmists increasingly recognize that bureaucratic solutions hatched at these conferences are rife with waste, fraud and abuse. They may enrich a few, but they are powerless to control Earth’s climate.

In March, German investigators reported that 850 million euros disappeared when shady companies swarmed into carbon trading, emissions and energy businesses.Criminal enterprises raked in tens of millions, fended off regulators with delaying tactics and then announced bankruptcy or vanished. An Italian sting operation resulted in arrests of wind-farm developers who billed the country for subsidies but never produced a kilowatt of electricity.

London’s liberal Guardian newspaper was aghast to learn that the World Bank’s Biocarbon Fund had arranged to pay European “entrepreneurs” $1 million to establish a system under which 60,000 Kenyans would restrict themselves to farming under rigidly controlled, inefficient, “sustainable” techniques. For that they will receive $1.4 million over 20 years.

That’s right, the beneficent World Bank will enrich more Europeans so 60,000 Kenyans can receive $23.83 apiece for 20 years of drudgery, poverty and misery – a princely $1.19 a year.

Even the European Union finally understands how little bureaucracy and energy deprivation dictates the climate. “It is not enough for the EU to simply sign up for another commitment period,” EU climate representative Jurgen Lefevere admitted. “We only represent 11 percent of global emissions.”

Burning fossil fuels contributes only a fraction of total annual atmospheric carbon dioxide buildup, and the EU contributes just 11 percent of that. The EU’s commitment to slashing CO2 emissions by 20 percent invites corruption, has no control over Chinese or Indian emissions and has no effect on the climate.

The biggest divide evident in Bonn was between the United States and large emerging economies. Even Obama administration officials who are thoroughly committed to man-made global warming catastrophe claims finally recognize the fraud problem. In Bonn, the U.S. insisted that all countries subject their emission reduction claims to verification.

However, China will accept only an agreement that lacks verification – and guarantees the right to cheat. Meanwhile, the Chinese are happy to be “the world’s leader” in manufacturing wind turbines – 95 percent – which they gladly sell to guilt-ridden Western countries.

China and other nations support the notion that prosperous countries owe the world restitution for the “sin” of engaging in the Industrial Revolution and becoming prosperous. We can only hope some nation’s representative will have the courage to remind China and its fellow climate travelers that the West never forced them to spend 50 years mired in communism, bureaucracy and stagnation.

While it is encouraging that the global warming camp no longer has things entirely its own way, celebration would be premature. For all the gnashing of teeth and complaining about corporate influence we hear from global warming bureaucrats and campaigners, the truth is that, today, the warmists are the establishment.

Billions are being redistributed to researchers, developing nations, carbon speculators, alternative energy investors and other carbon profiteers – who would like to turn billions into trillions. Pity the poor carbon traders whose markets expire with Kyoto. Not all have their villa in the sun yet.

But rest assured, they will do whatever is necessary to get theirs. Big Warming will not surrender its hold on Western taxpayers without a fight.

The warmist camp plans to retake the initiative at the December U.N. conference in Durban, South Africa. It intends to turn back the clock to the time when the media would attribute any weather or nature event to global warming, without question or critical examination. Al Gore’s recent RollingStone diatribe essentially calls on the media to censure climate disaster skeptics and adopt a one-sided man-made warming narrative.

The NewYorkTimes may go along, but the huge and growing alternative media will not. This week’s Heartland Institute international conference of climate-alarm skeptics in Washington will only reinforce the lack of evidence for man-made Armageddon, and the disastrous consequences of staying the current U.N. course.

Many believe the last-minute appearance by dozens of world leaders crippled the Copenhagen climate conference. But with the big names absent from Cancun, Mexico, and now Bonn, the U.N. wants them back.

Ms. Figueres capped the Bonn conference with a call for “high-level political attention.” If she succeeds, just imagine the mischief a gathering of heads of state, foreign ministers, bureaucrats, researchers, green campaigners and carbon profiteers can do at an African beach resort.

Then imagine how nearly impossible it will be to repair the harm they inflict. Action must be taken to avert such a result.

David Rothbard is president of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow. Craig Rucker is CFACT’s executive director.

CLICK TO VIEW NOW

This morning CFACT & EIKE presented a scientific briefing at the UN conference on climate change in Bonn, Germany.  The briefing was introduced by Wolfgang Müller of EIKE and Berlin’s Manhattan Institut and featured Professor em. Friedrich Karl Ewert a geologist from Paderborn University and Dr. Horst Borchert of the Johannes-Gutenberg Universität in Mainz.  The presentations build upon the analysis of Professor S. Fred Singer and provide information on the geological record, solar activity and the big question — is our climate governed by man or nature?

Holger Thuss, Executive Director, CFACT Europe

The UN climate conference in Bonn opens today and CFACT has partnered with EIKE to send a delegation led by Dr. Holger Thuss.  The UNFCCC is banking on these subsidiary conferences to set the stage for major agreements in Durban South Africa in December.  The global warming scare and the inept and corrupt nature of proposed solutions have fallen far out of favor with the public and policy makers are taking notice and defecting.  CFACT has scheduled a  UNFCCC hosted press conference for Wednesday, 14:00 CET in the Hotel Maritim’s room Haydn.  The press conference may be webcast live by the UN.  Stay in touch with CFACT Europe for further updates from Bonn.

Green campaigners routinely attack fruits and vegetables grown and protected using efficient modern methods.  No evidence exists that “organic” foods offer any nutritional benefits over foods produced by modern farming.  There were certainly no health benefits for the victims of this tragic outbreak.

To learn more about The Truth About Organic Foods, CFACT recommends Alex Avery’s book by that title.  CFACT Europe produced a translation of Mr. Avery’s book not too long ago available direct from the publisher  bestellung@tvrgroup.de

June 6 UPDATE: The death toll has risen and now organic sprouts from northern Germany are suspect.  No matter how you slice it the organic food bubble is leaking badly.  Once organic food safety is reestablished it is time to put them in their proper place.  “Organic” foods (as if there could be inorganic foods) require more labor and resources to produce and distribute and have no nutritional advantages.  They are an expensive consumer preference (like artisan cheese with less certain flavor advantages), but not a luxury that should interfere with the plentiful bounty modern efficient farming creates.  Developed countries today enjoy plentiful, affordable food for all for the first time ever.  A few constructive public policy tweaks and a neighborly helping hand is all it will take to permit the developing world to bring in just as fine a harvest.

June 6 UPDATE 2: Maybe not sprouts after all.

June 10 UPDATE: Organic sprouts again — 30 dead.

More on the outbreak:

Sprouts:  AP

Deutsche Welle

Yahoo News

Expatica Spain

German Chancellor Merkel’s announcement that all nuclear plants will be shut down within ten years has, rightly caused both joy, confusion and fear. Not just in Germany, but all over Europe.

That the announcement was triggered by the resurrected anti nuclear campaign, smelling fresh blood after the – no doubt – catastrophic accident in Japan is self evident. Another word for this is populism. Or, maybe, panic.

Once that public and apparently governmental panic has settled, it’s a fair guess that this hasty decision will be revoked in a few years time. Until then, the problems remain.

Germany is not Japan and also not a dangerous area for earthquakes. Chernobyl was a Soviet plant, with all what that contains of old technology and bad security measures.

The problem with nuclear power is that it carries – or should carry – high insurance costs. The solution is to let the industry, not the half or full governmental companies, run the plants. And, naturally, pay the insurance premium. The technological development for both the reactors and the post handling has developed enormously, but is hindered by regulations, and in this case hasty decisions. Virtually safe, smaller installations have been developed, but what’s the incentive to continue working when your project can be stopped any second by populist politicians?

A fair estimate is that due to this, electricity prices will double, having an impact on both industry and households, not only in Germany, but in most of Europe. That is no walk in the park.

One question remains. Will the Merkel government now follow in the footsteps of the previous Social Democrat/Green government and start ruining villages to make way for coal mines, as for example in Horno, the last Sorbian village? If that would cost less in popularity, something is definitely wrong.

The Süddeutschen Zeitung reports that German fraud investigators have found that €850 million fell off the table when shady companies swarmed into the carbon trading, emissions and energy business.  The criminal companies rake in tens to hundreds of millions, fend off regulators with delaying tactics and then announce bankruptcy or disappear.

Düsseldorf tax investigators found that in less than a quarter of an hour emissions certificates might change hands five times.  The same CO2 allowance would trade up to 18 times. A perverse form of recycling as the Süddeutschen Zeitung makes clear.

Fraud's new mascot

Elements of the investigation were code named “Odin,” “Tango,” and “Polar Bear.”  How appropriate that the cute, but vicious bear of the northern waste should become a code word for fraud after having long been the favorite propaganda image of warming pressure groups.

Carbon trading, global warming policies and alternative energy schemes have become favorite tools of organized crime.   CFACT’s Einar Du Rietz has written on mafia influence in wind farming.  Maybe the Wind Fellas Blew Them.  CFACT Europe has also reported on Italian carbon millionaire Oreste Vigorito’s fraud arrest.  While the criminal exploitation of global warming has cost billions, it is small change compared to the hundreds of billions being looted legally with the full cooperation and encouragement of governments and the UN.  How much more waste, fraud and abuse will free peoples tolerate before they shout, “ENOUGH!?”

MORE (Auf Deutsch) at Süddeutschen Zeitung

German electricity prices a barrier to business

EU Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger has told the German government that its taxes and fees on electricity have doubled since 1998, now stand at 41 percent and will continue to increase due to subsidies for alternative energy.  Oettinger warned that this has moved the gradual process of de-industrialization into full swing and is forcing business and industry to flee the country. German electricity costs were described as at the upper edge of what is socially reasonable.  How much more will German ratepayers tolerate before they reach their breaking point?

MORE (Auf Deustsch) AT HANDELSBLATT