In view of the coming Rio Earth Summit of 2012 in Brazil, it is interesting to see how the media is treating it, because prescriptions for change involve using OUR money to solve alleged problems.
This is why most First World countries have refused to sign on to the treaty, which begins with prognostications of doom and ends with those countries paying billions.
In Google’s summary from AFP: “UN environment haggle runs into problems ahead of summit,” it is hard to believe that a. the doomists can get so much so wrong in just 50 pages and b. the article accepts all of the premises. The article begins:
Disputed issues include text on climate-altering fossil fuels, promoting the green economy and providing funding for poorer countries. Another is how to strengthen world governance for the environment, an area where national sovereignty is jealously guarded.
There is a summary of the history of the effort:
Twenty years have elapsed since the first Earth Summit, where the community of nations declared war on poverty and environment ills. They set up three conventions to tackle climate change, desertification and species loss and drew up a bible, Agenda 21, intended to guide their actions.
Then, the article goes entirely off the rails: “But on almost every count, the planet is sicker than before.” Patently untrue, as the WSJ demonstrates pithily in “The Global Doomsayers’ Ever-Changing Story.”
Part of the preamble to Agenda 21 reads: “We are confronted with a perpetuation of disparities between and within nations, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being.”
The next sentence refutes that prediction. “In the 20 years since, something embarrassing has happened: a sharp decrease in poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy and a marked reduction in these global disparities. ”
And we might add, so too, with the constant predictions of “Peak Oil” – the idea that we have reached the highest production of oil that we ever will. Peak Oil has been predicted regularly ever since about one year after the first gusher in Titusville, Pennsylvania, more than 100 years ago.
Doomists, or Riocrats as WSJ author Matt Ridley calls them, keep changing the type of looming disaster, as each prediction fails. Rather than ignoring these bids to transfer our wealth, our governments should even stop going to these stupid summits.
Their own survival depends on it, as any politician busted by the Tea Party could tell them.