The US Chamber of Commerce is Killing the Copenhagen Climate Treaty

[kgrandia]

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has already done everything it can to kill the chances of a legally binding agreement emerging from the Copenhagen climate change summit.

Now it can sit back, relax and watch the action from a coffee shop outside the United Nations conference, content that its efforts to derail U.S. climate policy have effectively hamstrung the international negotiations.

As explained clearly in “The Global Climate Change Lobby,” an excellent new report from the Center for Public Integrity, corporate lobbyists and trade associations focus their attention on tampering with domestic legislative efforts, and then stand by and watch as their positions and talking points contaminate international negotiations indirectly.

Business interests (or BINGOs as they’re called in U.N. speak) “can have very little effect at these meetings,” according to Nick Campbell, a European industry lobbyist who has represented the International Chamber of Commerce at U.N. climate talks since the early 1990s when the global effort to fight climate change began with the Rio Earth Summit.

More: http://www.desmogblog.com/who%E2%80%99s-killing-copenhagen-chamber-commerce

[joshcryer]

1. To be expected, really.

[obliviously]

2. with the recent disclosure of the tampered with data

what do you expect?

[Hoopla Phil]

3. I would expect nothing less. ALL the data has to be redone in a open and

inclusive manner. The research base data MUST be above reproach.

[joshcryer]

5. Most of it has always been open, especially the most important data, such as NASAs.

[Hoopla Phil]

15. I'm talking about the source data that was destroyed and all the other data

that they refused to honor the FOIA requests on. It is going to take a lot of work and a long time to repair this damage. The scientific method is NOT something to take lightly or ignore. It is the foundation of science. To ignore it breaks the foundation of the research. That MUST be repaired post haste.

[joshcryer]

4. There's no evidence whatsoever of tampered data.

The Chamber of Commerce has had the same position long before the CRU emails which are used to confuse the discussion came out.

[obliviously]

6. Oh yes of course not

and the tooth fairy and Santa clause are real too!

[joshcryer]

7. Got evidence? It has taken some time for the CRU "proof" to infiltrate this subforum.

I recognize that other parts of DU have wholeheartedly brought in to it, give or take.

[obliviously]

8. DU has brought into what?

[joshcryer]

9. Some members of DU (outside of E&E mostly) have bought the story that CRU emails prove...

...collusion and tampering by scientists.

[obliviously]

10. So you are saying those are not real emails?

[joshcryer]

11. I am saying that the insinuations are not sufficient "evidence."

[obliviously]

12. You will find it hard to put the cat back in the bag

now that it has escaped!

[malakai2]

13. What cat?

What do the emails prove? I mean, other than a lot of people are really not as bright as they think they are.

[joshcryer]

14. If you could provide evidence, you would do so. But you can't, because it doesn't exist.

Show me one instance of collusion among scientists who tamper with the data.

[kristopher]

17. I have a very specific question on one piece of evidence.

What does the changing ph level of the oceans say to you?

It is clear data that is easily measured by any competent technician.

It has only one explanation.

It promises, without fail, extreme consequences for all life of the planet.

Are you aware of the problem and the consequences?

[kgrandia]

16. They're real

But a handful of emails between a few people, does not equal a giant conspiracy by thousands of scientists to fake a catastrophe that we are already seeing the results of.

I wonder if they all emailed each other to get together all the blow torches to sneak up to the Arctic and melt sea ice while we are all sleeping.