February 25, 2009
"UN Chief:Climate Change will continue for centuries!"
Well I certainly hope so! If the climate doesn't change the alternative would be.....well to quote our new Prez. CATASTROPHIC!
from Resilient Earth
America, what's the UN doing now? All this hysteria about Global Warming; notice the green folks no longer use the term global warming. Uh-uh! The new-term is "Climate Change." Jian Liu, Chief Of The Division Of Environmental Policy Implementation's Climate Change Adaptation Unit Of The United Nations Environmental Program (How about that for a title, fellow tax payers? Liu said in Jan 2009, "Even if the most stringent mitigation measures were put in place today, the impacts of climate change would still continue for centuries." OK, people, take a coin and flip it. Heads it is warmer, tails it is cooler in the next, who knows how many, centuries? What a farce.
Here is some of this guy's weird thinking placed into words. He says, "Let me start with the term 'Adaptation' which refers to Adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities (IPCC 2007.) Autonomous adaptation is an unconscious response to climatic change, triggered by automatic changes in a natural system and or in human systems. Planned adaptation is a deliberate policy decision, based on available knowledge that climate is really changing, or to change, and human beings have to prepare for action to return to, maintain, or achieve a desired state. There are knowledge gaps of course in understanding autonomous adaptation. I think research should be done to simulate and manipulate a natural or human system to identify the difference between NORMAL and ABNORMAL changes distorted by human induced climate change. Long-term process study is needed. This kind of results should benefit planned adaptation decision and activities."
This king of eco-babble has so tangled the U.N.'s environmental organizational structure, and so disorganized the central control, that the UN's own report says is not even possible to know how much money the U.N. system is spending on simply managing its environmental actions. (Such records, the report demurely states, "are not available.") But even a "rough estimate" is breath-taking: about $1.65 billion in 2006, the last year for which statistics were apparently available.
In one study, the report says, UNEP identified 60,000 environment-related projects being funded by various donors, and suggested that some kind of "information sharing system" about such projects would be advisable. It will never happened. Despite repeated prods to action, the head of UNEP hasn't come up with any program that even identifies the "roles, responsibilities and activities of U.N. agencies involved in the field of environment and MEAs."
Moreover, the managerial chaos is growing steadily more acute, as U.N. anti-poverty agencies increasingly jump on the environmental bandwagon and build overlapping and conflicting initiatives on environmental protection and "sustainable development" without clarifying the difference between the two activities.
Can you belive this beucratic monster goes on-and-on at the UN, the best con-game ever, running now for over a half-century? And who leads the charge these day? None other than the self-serving creep, Al Gore, the infinite bore.