Thongchai Thailand

A QUORA POST 3/1/2022

Posted on: March 1, 2022

QUESTION:

Is the just published IPCC report on climate change, which seems to be largely ignored in preference to reports from Ukraine, ultimately a lot more important than this conflict?

MY ANSWER

The IPCC has presented a much ballyhooed report about 6 months ago. What did they miss and what did they get wrong to line up again with another IPCC report? What has emerged in climate change since August 2021 that was not there 6 months ago? What we are seeing here surely is some kind of climate change activism where the magical acronym IPCC is invoked to keep climate activism on the front page and hide the complete failure of COP26 that comes in the heals of the failure of COP25, and the failures of all the rest of the cops going all the way back to COP1.

For details please see

THE PARIS AGREEMENT, A QUORA QUESTION : Since the Paris Agreement will not likely be met, how do you think your government can help to achieve the next goal, what do you think that goal should be? ANSWER: I would like to propose that the Paris Agreement has been met. The only AGREEMENT in the Paris Agreement is…https://tambonthongchai.com/2021/06/05/the-paris-agreement/

EXCERPT

We’ve left the action movie and we’re in a comedy.

The world is coming to an end, but gosh, chin up!

The only AGREEMENT in the Paris Agreement is that the participating countries AGREED TO SUBMIT INDCs.

That is all that the participating countries agreed to do.

And in fact all the countries that had agreed to submit INDCs did in fact submit INDCs.

BUT WHAT IS AN INDC????

The key to understanding the Paris agreement is to understand what an INDC is and what it isn’t

(1)First of all, the way we understand what the word agreement means is that there is one document – one statement, that all the participants signed and agreed to abide by.

But there is no such document in the Paris Agreement.

(2): This oddity of what is called an agreement is a creation of the failure of the COPs (United Nations Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC) and that failure is best understood in the context of the history of the UN’s ambition to be a kind of global Environmental Protection Agency by way of the UNEP (united nations environment program).

(3): The UNEP began life with a bang when the UN put together a Global Agreement called the Montreal Protocol where all the nations signed the same document agreeing to change refrigerants. This agreement is credited with having solved the ozone depletion crisis. This apparent success of the newly formed UNEP led to the assumption that the UN could likewise put together a “Montreal Protocol for climate change” (MPFC) with a global agreement to reduce global fossil fuel emissions.

(4): To get such an agreement signed by all nations, the UN put together a global agreement signed by almost all nations called the UNFCCC where the signatories agreed that climate change is a global problem that needs a global solution. The nations that signed this agreement are called Parties to the UNFCCC. The next and final step in resolving the climate crisis was to call a “Conference of Parties” or COP, for the parties to sign a binding emission reduction agreement. Sadly, the COP ended without a signed “Montreal Protocol for the Climate (MPFC).

(5): This failure was a significant event. Flustered and confused in the abject failure of the COP, the UN bureaucrats decided to call for another COP to be called COP2 and line up some more impressive speakers about the dangers of climate change and make some modifications to the emission reduction agreement to get the parties to sign the modified MPFC. But COP2 also failed.

(6): The UN bureaucrats were unable to comprehend the enormous difference between changing refrigerants and overhauling the world’s energy infrastructure. and ventured into a program of tweeking the contract and bringing in more impressive speakers and more scary assessments of what will happen to us and the world and maybe the planet if we don’t do the MPFC. The short version of this story is that after COP3, COP4, COP5, COP6, COP7, COP8, COP9, COP10, COP11, COP12, COP13, COP14, and the very dramatic COP15 in Copenhagen that was described by climate scientists, climate activists, and the UN bureaucrats as a DO OR DIE meeting. It died.

(7)But the climate movement and the UN could not accept this devastating failure and the UN bureaucrats decided that what they needed was a change in strategy. It was the devastating failure in Copenhagen that convinced the UN bureaucrats that more and more speakers with greater and greater fear of climate change will not work and will not deliver the MPFCIt was in Copenhagen that the subtle shift in strategy had to be made to keep toning down the demands in the MPFC until the all the Parties would sign the climate agreement.

Copenhagen - Wikipedia

(8): And so the climate agreement dream was not over yet and on we went to COP16, COP17, COP18, COP19, COP20, COP21, COP22, COP23, and COP24. But still no MPFC and still without an agreement.

(9): A dramatic shift in strategy came in COP25 in ParisThe new desperate strategy was this: If they won’t sign the contract we wrote let them write the contract that they will signAnd so it was that in COP25 in Paris, France that this new strategy was implemented where each nation could independently and in isolation write the agreement that it was willing to sign and then sign it. The collection of these “INDC”s that don’t agree is then assumed to be an AGREEMENT of some kind so the UN can say that they did their job and delivered the MPFC..

(10): The contradictions in this claim have gone unchallenged and so it is to this day that we still accept a collection of INDCs that don’t agree and that are not binding as some kind of global climate action contract that can be claimed to be the delivery of the promised MPFC.

Cirque du Soleil clowns in Paris, Nov 28 2012 - ABC News (Australian  Broadcasting Corporation)

(11): The reality is that the Paris Agreement is not an Agreement to agree but an agreement to disagree and that therefore there is no MPFC and no global agreement to cut global emissions and that this is why we are in an illogical climate action plan of the climate heroism of nation states without a MPFC to reduce global emissions.

NUMNUT UN BUREAUCRAT USES COVID TO SELL CLIMATE | Thongchai Thailand

(12): The new strategy of climate heroism of nation states is something to which the UN fully agrees as the UN Secretary General has framed his new climate action program as some kind of cheerleader making speeches for “AMBITION” of nation states to cut emissions. This is now the confused state of affairs in the expectation that the UN would deliver the MPFCThat didn’t happen. We do not have an MPFC.

That's All Folks HD - YouTube

(13): THE ONLY FUNCTION OF THE PARIS AGREEMENT IS THAT IT ALLOWS THE UN TO PUNCH OUT WITH A FACE SAVING CLAIM OF HAVING DELIVERED THE EXPECTED MPFC SUCCESS.

ABOUT THE UN

LINK#1: https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/03/18/the-eco-crisis-ambition-of-the-un/

LINK#2: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/02/25/un/

Former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said recently that people have “tuned out” the climate change activism movement because it is “stuck in despair and confusion.” The activists are “wearing the public out” with their apocalyptic warnings of an “existential threat” to life on earth, Schwarzenegger warned in a speech at a climate summit he co-hosted in Austria. He said the focus should be on pollution from fossil fuels, “because that kills people.” Climate activists have succeeded in persuading many people that we’re on our way to human extinction and picking up speed. Schwarzenegger warned that this has created “constant alarm which cannot be sustained.” Another hint that pollsters are picking up signs of trouble for climate alarmism can be seen in a recent fundraising email from a climate activist group, 350.org. It quotes a leaked draft of the latest report of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that purportedly warns of “irreversible climate impacts,” and “much sooner than originally expected, causing even more extreme weather patterns, unlivable heat, widespread disease, ecosystem collapse… Then it asks for money, because “this crisis is so very urgent.” Apparently sending them $3.50 will help to “prevent the worst impacts of the climate crisis.” That’s followed by this: “The last thing I want, Susan, is for you to read this email and come away from it feeling hopeless or discouraged.”

We’ve left the action movie and we’re in a comedy. The world is coming to an end, but gosh, chin up!

2 Responses to "A QUORA POST 3/1/2022"

The elites at the UN are just trying to decide how to divide up the carbon tax money from the developed nations, and how to keep a lid on the fact that CO2 is heavier than aluminum and can’t possibly accumulate in the atmosphere and have any effect whatsoever on the global temperature.

Thank you again Ruben for your valued comments

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: