COP27: Who Voted For Wealth Redistribution To Save The Planet?

by A.L. Urban, Nov 17, 2022 in ClimateChangeDispatch


Politicians of all stripes and in all Western countries have been obediently parroting the official IPCC line that Climate Change science knows best and that we must prepare for the worst.

But as COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh (I refer to it as Sham in Chief) comes to an end (November 18), it’s worth noting that it was a cloaking device for the real agenda. [emphasis, links added]

I believe that politicians are feeble and incompetent rather than so massively corrupt (dishonest) as to hoist this agenda on an innocently ignorant voting public who never signed up for it.

But time’s up and political advisors should begin devising new advice based on the known facts, so voters are not misled so egregiously.

‘Save the planet – vote for wealth distribution.’

‘Vote to be poor so the world’s poor can get richer.’

Of course, it is not only Australian politicians (of all parties) but the politicians of the whole Western world who have been sucked into this sham.

The special irony for Australia, though, is that if it is fossil fuel emissions that are the danger, ours is the least relevant, at around 1 percent.

So even if you were convinced that carbon dioxide (emitted when making energy) is a pollutant and warms the planet, with just a few years left of life on Earth … you can’t seriously believe that our drastic economy-destroying policies can be justified?

The total carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is 0.04 percent. Man-made carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is about 0.0012 percent; Australia’s contribution to that is 0.000012 percent.

You don’t have to be a mathematician or a scientist to realize that our coal has nothing to do with the climate changing.

While 30,000 ‘Climate Change’ activist industry delegates swarmed to Sharm el Sheikh, blinded by faith and hope for change, elsewhere, the real world was hunkering down to cope with energy shortages and inflation, and the coming northern winter.

The false assumption about fossil fuel emissions as the driver of warming has been sold with spectacular if fateful success. And a large dose of dishonesty.