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
Interview with Mike Sankey
What is your background? I am a registered PMP (Project Management Professional) as well as a Professional Quantity Surveyor, so I hold a BSc QS Hons. I have been in the construction industry since qualifying in 1988.
Interview with Andreas N. Angelakis
What is your background?I hold a Bachelor of Agricultural Science from the Agricultural University of Athens (1962) and a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering from the University of California, Davis (1976)
First CERES podcast is online
First CERES podcast is online In this new podcast series, the CERES team will talk about science – reviewing the latest science, revisiting old scientific questions, and discussing some of CERES’s own scientific research. Often their discussions can be quite controversial because the team is more interested in figuring out what is scientifically [...]







