At the U.N. climate talks — called COP21 — everyone’s attention is focused on a 48-page document that could determine the very fate of the planet.
Say that three times fast.
That’s a (bad) joke, of course, but high-ranking officials here actually are struggling to say the always-changing name of this all-important text aloud.
Most seem to be interpreting “/” mark as “stroke.”
“FCCC-stroke-ADP-stroke-2015-stroke-L6-stroke-Rev1-stroke-Ad1,” Daniel Reifsnyder, who had been helping to oversee the negotiation process here, said in front of a room of hundreds Saturday, his image broadcast onto four local screens and his words translated live into several languages.
“Oof,” he added.
A little comic relief.
There’s a somewhat farcical quality to this important U.N. process, which I do believe is essential if we’re going to slow our pollution and avoid the worst effects of climate change, including super-droughts, extinctions and dangerous sea-level rise. What happens here in a Paris suburb matters to literally everyone on Earth. On the table now is whether countries want to limit warming to 1.5 or 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, which could determine the fate of low-lying Pacific nations such as the Marshall Islands. Success here could help commit 195 countries to ratcheting down their use of fossil fuels — sending clear signals to markets and politicians that the era of oil and coal is drawing to a close.
Failure would help royally screw up the planet for us and future generations.
Most leftist propaganda disseminated by the media is known to be propaganda by those disseminating it.
Not so with the climate-change hysteria, as it has replaced God and religion for the leftists. They are the most rabidly devout proselytizers on this planet they naively think they hold sway over. Tent revivals don’t see this much unquestioning devotion.
That this conference took place against a backdrop of very recent terrorist attacks and still attempted to sell perennially wrong computer models about weather as the greatest threat to mankind makes Climate Church loons worthy of even more derision.
The most disturbing bit of bias is the “Editor’s Note” at the top of this ostensible opinion piece:
CNN Opinion columnist John D. Sutter is reporting on a tiny number — 2 degrees — that may have a huge effect on the future. You can subscribe to the “2 degrees” newsletter or follow him on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. He’s jdsutter on Snapchat. You can shape this coverage.
Is it an opinion post or news “coverage”?
Is there any difference anywhere in American journalism anymore?