COP30 Is Lying To Justify Its Existence
COP30 is building its case on climate misinformation that rewrites the past to claim a victory it never earned.
The COP30 agreement claims the world was previously on track for more than 4C of warming until the Paris Agreement heroically “bent” that trajectory down to 2.3–2.5C:
However, “this is misinformation,” says Roger Pielke Jr., Professor of Environmental Studies at the University of Colorado Boulder. It is a fiction built on the carcass of RCP8.5 — the extreme scenario that scientists quietly abandoned years ago because it required impossible coal use, implausible demographics and an economic collapse that never happened.
COP30 is resurrecting an unrealistic, disowned scenario in order to claim that Paris saved the world. The problem is the data. Real-world emissions show no curve bending, no slowdown and no “Paris effect”.
Paris didn’t change emissions, but it did unlock a permanent justification for climate taxation, energy rationing and the dismantling of cheap, reliable power — the foundation of economic prosperity.
COP30 needs a victory to justify its existence. So it has rewritten history: invent a 4C trajectory, pretend Paris knocked it down, and congratulate itself for saving humanity.
The world was never heading for RCP8.5. Paris didn’t change emissions.
Lies.
more news
The Forced EV Revolution — the Big-government Boom that Busted and Ford alone blew $20b US
Jo Nova about the EV bubble, or what’s left of it, that popped this week.
Europe’s ‘Green’ Emperor Is Naked and Cold
Europe stands as the self-proclaimed cathedral of the “green” transition. Bureaucrats in Brussels and politicians in Berlin have spent decades lecturing the world on the moral necessity to abandon hydrocarbons. They have constructed a narrative of the European Union as a shining city powered by the breeze and sun, modeling a net-zero utopia.
Wrong Again PBS, UN Is Pushing Another False Climate Crisis Report
Explore why this new climate report from the U.N., and its coverage by PBS, may not be telling the full story — and what that means for public understanding of climate science.
