Thread by @SteB777

I want to propose something very serious, that needs to be considered, and widely known.

Was the official "fight" against climate change, deliberately set up to fail i.e. it was fixed, it was never meant to succeed, and it's primary purpose, was to deceive the public?
1/🧵

This is not something I am just saying now, I first proposed this possibility in September/October 1992, just after the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, to a leading scientist, who had written the standard textbook on air pollution and climate change.

2/independent.co.uk/arts-entertain…

Specifically, at a seminar, I asked how could we be certain that our political leaders, were simply not going to renege on the promises and pledges, they made at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, as they had on the Action Plan at the first 1972 UN Environment Conference?
3/

After all, the only reason the 1992 Rio Earth Summit took place, is because the world's governments had taken no action whatsoever, on the Action Plan they had agreed to at the first UN Environment Conference. So it was a fair question.

4/un.org/en/conferences…

The Wikipedia page has been re-written. It used to say, the UN were alarmed.

"Ten years after the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, a number of global environmental challenges had not been adequately addressed."

5/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brundtlan…

The Brundtland Commission, and it's report, Our Common Future, led directly to the 1992 Rio Earth Summit.

My claim that the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, only happened due to failure to take action agreed to in 1972, is supported by the evidence.

6/sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/docume…

I am not suggesting that the UN, or those involved in formulated these agreements, were involved in setting up these agreements to fail, but that the governments who signed them, never had any intention of doing what they agreed to.
7/

I present a massive and damning piece of circumstantial evidence, which I say, absolutely proves that governments, never had any intention of doing what they pledged at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit.
8/

This is just about climate change and the UNFCCC, and not the rest of the sustainability/ecological crisis, the 1992 Rio Earth Summit was actually about.

It's always been known that the only way to prevent dangerous climate change, is to phase out fossil fuel burning.
9/

So where is there any evidence, that governments, ever had such a plan?

Remember, the current rationalist narrative, is that governments found it too hard to do. But where is the evidence, that governments, ever even had a notion to phase out fossil fuels. There is none.
10/

Major governments at the COP talks, set up by the UNFCCC in 1992, have gone to massive lengths, to stop any binding wording about phasing out fossil fuel burning, to ever be entered into the agreements, in 33 years.
11/

The UNFCCC saw itself as a continuation, to the 1987 Montreal Protocol, which led to the phasing out of CFCs, which were causing a dangerous thinning of the Earth's upper ozone layer. The UNFCCC actually states this, repeatedly,
12/

"containing measures to mitigate climate change by
addressing anthropogenic emissions by sources and
removals by sinks of all greenhouse gases not
controlled by the Montreal Protocol"

That is a direct quotation from the UNFCCC.

13/unfccc.int/files/essentia…

Note how it says "to mitigate climate change by
addressing anthropogenic emissions by sources". It maybe in diplomatic language, to allow the precise policy/strategy, to be decided in COP talks, but it was clearly about eliminating the sources of greenhouse gas emissions.
14/

Therefore, only by eliminating the sources of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, driving dangerous climate change, could we ever hope to avert dangerous climate change, and climate catastrophe.

15/theguardian.com/commentisfree/…

In other words, any plan, not to eliminate the sources of these anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions i.e. the large scale burning of fossil fuels, was totally unrealistic, and would lead to out of control climate change. This is what we now face.

16/theguardian.com/environment/20…

Even the most optimistic (I say unrealistically optimistic), prominent scientists and techno-optimists, admit, that it would be very difficult, to nigh impossible for our civilization to exist at 3C of warming. Yet we are on course to 4C+ warming, with no plan to stop it.
17/

I say, the idea that our civilization could still exist, well before 3C of warming, is totally unrealistic. Based on false assumptions about the robustness of our present system, which has never been researched, at all.

18/pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn…

This is why I say, the fight to stop climate change, was as fixed as a professional wrestling bout. That it was set up to fail, by our governments, not doing anything at all to facilitate the only means by which dangerous climate change, could be prevented.
19/

Because governments are so secretive, we never know what their actual plans are, so when they told us all, that they were committed to addressing the climate crisis, and to stop dangerous climate change, we just had to take their word for it.
20/

Not only is it me saying that our governments are liars, and the last 33 years are a litany of broken climate promises, but that is what the UN Secretary General @antonioguterres says. However, I say, this is far more than just procrastination.

21/

I assert, that our governments knew when they pledged to reduce emissions and avert dangerous climate change, 33 years ago, that they knew they were lying, and that they never had any intention of phasing out fossil fuel burning.
22/

If they intended it, but found it too difficult, then where is there any evidence at all, that they ever had a plan to phase out fossil fuel burning, the only realistic way, of averting dangerous climate change? They never even tried, or had a plan.
23/

My reason for posting this, is because we must recognize the reality, and snap out of the denial. Our governments are run by professional liars, who represent powerful vested interests, and oligarchs, and not the people they claim to represent.
24/

@KevinClimate @jrockstrom @rahmstorf @GreenJennyJones @natalieben @CarolineLucas @GretaThunberg @ExtinctionR @ClimateBen @ClimateDad77 @ClimateHuman @ECOWARRIORSS @MrMatthewTodd

@threadreaderapp unroll