Is Deadlocked Durban the Last Chance to Save the World?

...now it’s official. This year’s Durban Conference, the United Nation’s Convention on Climate Change, known as COP 17, is once again the last chance to save the world:

Churches claim Durban conference is mankind’s last chance

Rev. Dr. Olav Fyske Tveit, who leads the World Council of Churches, says the upcoming climate conference in South Africa is mankind’s ‘last opportunity’ to address climate change.

Can it be true? Is the deadlocked Durban Climate Conference truly the last chance to save the Earth? Or have we perhaps heard that sort of talk somewhere before?

Back in 1992, the Rio Earth Summit was promoted as the last chance to save the planet.

But then, so was Johannesburg in 2002.

But that was before the Bali climate conference became the last chance to save the world in 2007.

And let’s not forget Poznan in 2008 which was the last chance to save the world according to the World Wildlife Fund.

And who could forget the last chance to save the world at Copenhagen, as proposed to us by the UK’s leading expert on climate change, Sir Nicholas Stern.

...The strangest thing about all this is that despite believing that it is now too late, several of these people are at the conference, and their items for discussion are not what to do before the end of the world.

Surely Nicholas Stern would be at home drowning himself in alcohol, or at least, making passionate love to strangers in lifts?

In fact, Stern is not only at the Durban Conference, he holds a number of prominent positions at COP17 and is even offering people advice about cutting down the use of fossil fuels – none of which seem to involve avoiding these kinds of conferences. _AsianCorrespondent_via_GWPF

Of course, if history is any guide, the world will have ended countless times before -- decades, centuries, and millenia ago.

The true question is: Why do people continue to fall for this same end-of-the-world scam, time after time? Why does the media uncritically repeat the doomsaying, why do academics both generate and echo these mouldy leftover prophecies of apocalypse?

We know why the doomsayers themselves continue to recycle these predictions of doom: They help to provide them with a lucrative income and the sort of jetsetting and partying lifestyle to which they have become accustomed. We know why the UN and its IPCC continue propagating this one-sided nonsense: Many trillions of dollars in climate reparations are at stake, $trillions which will flow through the fingers of the UN itself.

The US is being blamed for the failure of the Durban talks by much of the global skankstream media -- even though US carbon emissions have fallen, while emissions in most of the rest of the world have risen. The truth is, Obama's choices are limited.

If US voters had not turned against Obama and his dem-congress in 2010, the story in Durban might well have turned out quite differently, with the US siding with "the end of the worlders" in committing advanced nations to a massive, unpaid transfer of wealth and technology to the third world and emerging nations such as China and India. Such a commitment would quickly destroy any vanishing traces of affluence from the advanced nations of Europe and the Anglosphere.

But Obama cannot chance going so blatantly against US voter sentiment, so close to the next US presidential and congressional elections. And no matter how vehemently journalists of Europe and North America may condemn the US delegation for its "obstructionism" in Durban, they owe their continuing hopes for a prosperous future on the continuation of such obstructionism.