Burning Fossil Fuels Unifies World In Paris

Paris Climate Conference Conclusion: Limit to 1.5 Degree C

This is an important step forward: the admission that the situation is much worse than anticipated, and that the global temperature rise should be limited much more. Three quarters (¾) of CO2 comes from fossil fuel combustion.

The accord is “juridiquement contraignant” said the French Foreign minister, Fabius, an ex-PM, and president of the conference. Fabius has more gravitas than the French president himself. The latter came at the end of the conference to insist that the accord, after so much work, had to be juridically constraining.

Let’s hope the U.S. Congress does not die laughing, it would be replaced by some representatives, just the same, and even worse. The problem with the European colony in North America, is that it does not know yet the wisdom which an utter catastrophe would visit upon it.

More Than 100 Heads Of States in Paris Unify For Progress

More Than 100 Heads Of States in Paris Unify For Progress

France, its institutions, people, and history, oral or not, have known more than twenty utter catastrophes in the last five centuries alone, thus, much of what defines France got much wiser.

Seven years ago, I insisted that “2 C Is Too Much”. I am happy that this viewpoint has been adopted by the 195 countries gathered in Paris.

The anti-civilization, pro-apocalyptic terrorists sent by the worshippers of Muhammad, contributed to make all delegates from the 195 countries work much harder. “This [accord on CO2 crisis] demonstrates the strength of the French nation and makes us Europeans all proud of the French nation,” said Miguel Arias Cañete, the European Union’s commissioner for energy and climate action.

Why is France special that way? Because France is historically the strongest state in Europe, the only one arrogant, strong enough to declare itself an empire of its own… Eleven (11) centuries ago! It then was decided the French king was “emperor in its own kingdom”… and let the rest of the Renovated Roman Empire find its own way alone. Ultimately, that separation, this sort of apartheid, was no wise, as French and Germans got alienated to each other, bringing a millennium of war. This had to be remedied, and has been remedied now, with the (still very imperfect) construction of the European Union.

But that does not mean that the strength of the French state should be diluted inside the European Union (the same holds for Britain, the other part of France). Instead Europe has to amplify French strength (something the Germans presently agree to). Use France as a point, a Spitze (excellent German word), to forge ahead. This is exactly what happened at the climate conference (and the same Spitze will hopefully transpierce fatally the Islamist State).

My reasoning for insisting that the temperature rise should be limited to less than two degrees centigrade was simple: if GLOBAL temperatures went up to 2 degrees Centigrade (“Celsius”), the rise of temperature in the polar regions may be as much as much as ten degree C, and the resulting catastrophe would send the climate back to the all too balmy Jurassic, and its omnipresent shallow seas, probably for the next 50,000 years.

A Jurassic planet could be interesting in many ways (wheat growing in Antarctica, extensive forests there, and all over the coldest lands, except for high mountains). However, short term, switching to the warm Jurassic would lead to severe disruptions, and could even bring the greatest wars ever.

On the other hand, cynics may notice, 195 nations worked hard, for years, for that Paris Climate Conference. And it’s not over: the next COP (Conference of the Parties) is next year in Morocco (more or less a willing vassal of France). 195 countries came to agree that burning fossil fuels will have to stop soon in Paris. Now it has to be enforced. That is feasible, only if much more research and development of new science and technologies is pushed worldwide. Just pushing around money will not change anything, as the fable of the self-regulation of “free markets” is an important contributor to the CO2 crisis, the climate crisis, the pollution crisis, and the extinction crisis.

In other words, 195 countries came to agree that massive scientific, thus philosophical, progress should be the law of the world.

This is major. It changes the mood towards more world government, in a very positive way. As the Qur’an itself recognizes, and the Romans long knew, war can unify a people against a common enemy. Our common enemy here is the habit of burning fossil fuels, launched by Neanderthals in… France, more than 70,000 years ago. It was good while it lasted, but life is never the eternal returning of the same (contrarily to what Hinduism and its parrot Nietzsche affect to believe).

Instead, at some point, we have to “step forward” (this is what progress means, from the Latin “gradus”, a step, and pro, forward).

Inspecting history, we see that ecological constraints were one of the main factors in conflicts. It’s good to see that 195 countries also understand this, now.

Patrice Ayme’

Tags: , , ,

10 Responses to “Burning Fossil Fuels Unifies World In Paris”

  1. Gmax Says:

    Ironical title! ,-)


  2. Benign Says:

    So uncharacteristically optimistic!

    It is possible that solar cycle 24 and 25, both expected to be quite weak, with 25 (upcoming) weaker than 24, will forestall the warming already inevitable, provide a false resolution, with the final “whammy” coming in about 40 years, when a normal solar cycle plays catch up with the climate possibly causing a catastrophic climatic discontinuity (disclaimer: speculation).

    Will world government solve the climate problem? I think not. Consciously or not, the plutocrats may be conspiring to cause a mass human die-off, knowing that if the world is not destroyed by war, their resources will buy a technological solution to the problem for their descendants.

    Until the plutocrats’s wealth is demolished, they will not join humanity in fighting CO2, because the climate catastrophe is fine with them.

    The plutocrats “own” world government.

    Judging by national and supra-national governments’ actions today (EU, USA), creating die-offs among “peripheral” populations is just fine. As with the USSR in the years before it fell, the US is experiencing declines of life expectancy for large swathes of the less-advantaged US population.



    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Hello Benign!
      Well, I think all NGOs and people worried by the CO2 Crisis are breathing a huge sigh of relief. The solution is not at hand, BUT THE MOOD HAS CHANGED. We are still, as it is on target for the complete melting of the poles… But everybody has now officially agreed there is a huge problem.
      And, BTW, that “2 C IS TOO MUCH!” was controversial among scientists even THREE WEEKS AGO.

      So, from my point of view, it is as if my point of view had FLOATED OVER. So, yes, I celebrate, uncharacteristically…

      World Government exists. Or, rather, world governments: there is the United Nations we can see, and then there is SPECTRE, the world wide organization of plutocrats, also known as the Davos Crowd, etc. We have to get rid of the latter.

      Well, what’s happening with the USA health system is not surprising: Obamacare was a magnificent dressing over the festering, untreated gangrene of rampaging, plutocratic driven health care costs. I basically said words to this effect, and was blacklisted in many MSM. Even Donald Trump has said more positive things about single payer and socialized medicine than Obama ever did (he claimed it works). It’s just a matter of time before Obamacare is to healthcare what invading Iraq was to human rights.

      This, BTW, explains both the popularity of Trump and Sanders. The establishment does not have to worry about the later…
      The plutocrats certainly own the ECB, which is not surprising, one of the own heading it…


  3. EugenR Says:

    Let’s hope your optimistic view is justified. Personally i am also tired of my pessimism, yet better to be a pessimist and be wrong, than the other way.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Optimism is justified because:
      1) The accord was adopted unanimously. Fabius, president of the Conference, said he had the accord in front of him, asked, solemnly, in the last minute, whether any of the 195 delegates, and other in the assistance of thousands, had any objection. He said he heard none. Then he said the accord was accepted.

      So exit CO2 deniers, forever. First UNIVERSAL change of mood.

      Second UNIVERSAL change of mood; it’s agreed that one should stick as much as possible to 1.5 degree Centigrade.

      Third, this is an important step ahead in world government, because of the gravity of the matter and the unanimity and the fact it will require giant, philosophical embrace of progress and altruism (countries such as Russia, Canada, profit from the CO2 crisis, long term).

      Now lots of work has to be done. And anger has to be called to bear ASAP. For example the USA tried to sabotage the accord at the last moment. Everybody bent over backwards, as the USA used it’s usual blackmail, exactly the same as in the 1990s, under Clinton. But the French were ready: they had a significant ally, China. Second Germany can’t get away with coal craziness, and should present a plan out of that immediately. And so on.

      Next year the COP 22 is in Morocco, which has Africa’s greatest wind farm, and the world’s greatest solar farm… And works in close collaboration with France and Spain…

      Liked by 1 person

  4. John Rogers Says:

    Of course, the bag of hammers who chairs the Senate environmental committee is not fooled.

    When you look at this guy and the Republican presidential clown car, you really have to wonder if there’s a secret laboratory somewhere turning out the morons who vote for these people.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Obama and Kerry knew of this, so Kerry blackmailed the entire conference about this. The final text cancelled the word “must”, so that the final text escaped Inhofe. Anyway, the conference was about a change of MOODS. Unanimously.

      From the link:

      Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said the agreement is no different from the Kyoto Protocol on climate change adopted 18 years ago.

      “The news remains the same. This agreement is no more binding than any other ‘agreement’ from any conference of the parties over the last 21 years,” Inhofe said in a Saturday statement.
      “Senate leadership has already been outspoken in its positions that the United States is not legally bound to any agreement setting emissions targets or any financial commitment to it without approval by Congress.”

      Inhofe, an outspoken doubter of the human role in climate change, has worked in recent months to undermine the agreement and demand that it be submitted to the Senate for approval, which it would not get.

      In his Saturday statement, he criticized many aspects of the deal, including his contention that nations like China and India, two of the largest greenhouse gas emitters, will not be held to high standards.

      He also hit the pact for the fact that many countries’ emissions reductions pledges do not say how they will meet them, and for setting arbitrary international goals.

      Inhofe reiterated his anger for the fact that the Environmental Protection Agency and the White House Council on Environmental Quality did not agree to testify at his committee on the Paris conference.


      • John Rogers Says:

        Maybe you’re right and the important thing is the change in mood. We can only hope that their American cousins (i.e., Cruz, Trump and company) suffer the same fate as Marine Le Pen’s fascists.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Trump long represented for me the problem with American banks. However I never considered him a fascist (although he is definitively a plutocrat, he used to be for single payer, or socialized medicine, etc) People have liked Trump because he is against the establishment (I have NOT followed the Republican debates, so I know not what Trump said recently, except his Muslim moratorium, which was partly voted within 72 hours; and more votes that way are coming say a democrat who wants more restrictions…)

          The French FN got 6.5 million votes this time, which is more than 10% of what Obama got… (If you scale to population, that means the FN got half of the votes of Obama…) Obama may be reassuring to everybody, but I did not see any plutocrat getting slowed down in the last seven years… I saw lots of fracking, though, and the USA getting richer that way, creating nearly triple the CO2 per person than the French do…


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

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: