The global warming conference’s gigantic carbon footprint

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Why are people skeptical of the global warming fear-mongers? Because they do not practice what they preach, flying to huge unnecessary conferences and producing 23,000 times more carbon dioxide then an average American in a year.

Yes, these conferences are unnecessary.

It’s 2015. We have incredibly advanced telecommuting systems. All of the political and scientific work behind a climate conference is performed using such global computer networking, long before the conference is held. Climate confabs are an excuse for politicians to soak their taxpayers for luxury junkets to exotic vacation destinations, where they stay in five-star hotels and dine on the finest gourmet foods.

(Lunch at the Paris climate conference on Monday, according to Politico: special turnip soup, scallops in a climate-symbolic “modern” sauce, stuffed celery confit with veined spinach cream, and then a trilogy of freshwater trout roe caviar, vegetable jelly, and coltsfoot, plus Reblochon au jus scented with myyrh, caraway wood, and a salad of wild undergrowth and tree beans. And yes, of course there will be dessert – citrus compote and light cream with praline.)

Climate conferences are pricey photo ops with no valid purpose beyond influencing media coverage, a fact the grandees at the Paris event have emphasized with their insulting blather about how holding the conference will somehow “rebuke” the Islamic State.

The hilariously obvious truth that no one attending the event actually believes the apocalyptic predictions they dump on their constituents makes these conferences into the equivalent of a “safari” at Disney World – a chance to laugh, hang out with friends, and enjoy a little shiver of play-acting fear as animatronic wild animals lunge at your robot-piloted jungle cruise boat.

The article researches the carbon footprint of the Paris conference, and finds it to be quite significant. If these leftwing global warming activists (they are not scientists, as this conference has nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics) really believed their lies about how fossil fuels and global warming was going to destroy humanity, they would never agree to their periodic parties in five-star hotels in beautiful cities throughout the world.


  • Cotour

    Yeah, but the photo ops, the Hennessy, the Champagne, the restaurants, the spending of other peoples money!

    If you remember I have a friend who has been working for the U.N. for the last 2 to 3 years and I saw him over the holiday. While he still admires the U.N.’s stated mission, being inside the beast is a different story. I will assume it is much the same within these “climate change” organizations within and without the U.N. Lots of good looking women, the best of the best.

    Has my friend become disillusioned being “inside”? He describes massive employment in his section, no one really knows how many people work there, 600 people? 900 people? Unknown to him. His mundane chores are driving him nuts and he is currently looking for another opportunity else were. He says that if he stays there he will go insane.

  • chris l

    These are important people doing important things. It is not for us, the unwashed, to question what they do.

  • Edward

    Robert wrote: “If these leftwing global warming activists … really believed their lies about how fossil fuels and global warming was going to destroy humanity, …”

    Even the press does not believe the lies. Not only do they fail to question the value of the huge carbon quarry (the word “footprint” suggests a small and temporary effect), they have added to it by going to report in person.

    No one that you have ever talked to about global warming believes in it (or whatever the nom-du-jour), otherwise they would not cook their food, travel other than by foot or bicycle (even electric cars have to be charged, adding to the amount of fossil fuels burned to produce that electricity, because the renewable sources power other necessary equipment, such as water purification and distribution plants), buy manufactured goods, or do anything that requires an addition to the burning of fossil fuels.

    They only say they believe in it in order to go along to get along with their friends, who may shun them if they don’t — despite not believing in global warming either. Even the Los Angeles Times refuses to print anything, including letters to the editor that suggests the bogus nature of global warming – talk about being shunned! Everyone wants to fit in (remember high school? I prefer not to); this is one of the ways that they do it.

    In addition to the calculation of all the 50,000 people travelling to the boondoggle, the article’s reference, “Wired” magazine, failed to include in their carbon calculation the aircraft and trains needed to bring the kings’ and queens’ motorcades. Each brings and returns his own. As noted, the US president alone has close to four dozen vehicles to fly in and fly out.

    Except for “showing them,” these world leaders-by-poor-example ignore the clear and present danger of the terrorists who are now ravaging the world. Instead, they meet in favor of their most important cause: the nebulous and distant possible danger of some kind of global warming coming in a century (or two, depending upon who is doing the prognostication). Note that not one of their predictions has come true. Not one. I would laugh, if these guys weren’t planning to ravage the world just as badly as the terrorists, with their plans to rob from the rich nations so that they can keep the poor nations in poverty.

  • Cotour

    I am surprised that the powers that be would allow something like this to be shown in Paris during the “climate summit”.

  • Frank

    Once again our president sells out America for his apologetic agenda. His redistributive war on white men fits nicely with the UN’s.

  • Rick

    Wonder if Obama can top his last climate talks with China. Where he committed to reducing our emissions a sizable chunk now and China agreed to think about it several decades down the road.

  • Cotour

    Listen to these two D bags explaining the connection between “climate change” and terrorism, trying to buttress what our D bag in chief has stated (sorry for the low level name calling but they really deserve it). “because people live in an area where there is a drought and they become disaffected they tend to move to the cities and of course become terrorists and commit murder in Paris.”

    They imply that any drought that occurs now on our planet is caused by “climate change” (technically correct but its not how they mean it, the climate can do nothing other than change). How many people disaffected by drought in California or anywhere else have become terrorists?

    These are dangerous people and on top of that these Americans are embarrassing me.

  • Please, you do yourself no good by name-calling, even if the people you are discussing deserve it. Bill Nye can be called ignorant (he doesn’t really know that much about the climate field, something which can be demonstrated), foolish (for expressing foolish opinions), or stupid (for taking demonstrably stupid positions). In each case, I can do so because of what he does.

    Calling him names that do not apply to his known actions, however, is self-defeating. It discredits you.

  • Cotour

    I fully agree with you (as my included apology indicates), but I was in the moment and chose not to edit myself in order to more fully communicate my outrage at what they were both presenting as a logic tying together “climate change” and terrorism.

    These are the talking heads that are twisting and literally making stupid the children and the people of America unable to critically assess what they so smoothly explain as being reality. Like Obama they ride a line of logical thinking in order to indoctrinate others to their thinking. Bill Nye probably actually believes what have become his conclusions, Obama on the other hand is a well train manipulator.

    I again apologize for my low level language but sometimes in extreme cases I am unable to rise above my disbelief.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *