China hits back at claims it is blocking climate talks < German news | Expatica Germany

China hit back Thursday at claims it was holding up global climate talks in Germany, saying the United States, Europe and other rich states were the ones applying the brakes.

Developed nations are trying to wriggle out of legal targets to curb global warming, Chinese chief negotiator Su Wei told AFP.

"They try to evade the legally binding commitments," he said on the sidelines of negotiations in the former German capital Bonn.

On Wednesday, the European Union warned that the effort to forge a new global pact on climate change by 2015 was in danger of floundering, and some negotiators pointed the finger at China.

"It is very dirty communication politics," Su said sharply, insisting his country has "shown a lot of flexibility."

On Not Having Joe Bast to Kick Around Anymore | Planet3.0

Clearly, defeating or at least diminishing Heartland is a positive step, but it is a long way from victory. We have not yet, though, cashed the check that Peter Gleick wrote for us. What we see so far is just an advance.

What is important is to look at the whole structure of right wing philathropies and how they warp public discourse. After all, what does “Donors Trust will never allow any funds to drift to organizations on the left” mean? What could it possibly mean? I think it means “all funds will be used to defend the privileges of the rich and not a penny will go to anyone or anything that actually needs it”.

But what of those “organizations of the left”? In “The Philanthropic Complex“ a remarkable and compelling essay at the alarmingly named Jacobin magazine, by Curtis White, an argument is made that leftish (really, Democrat-leaning) charities in the US are also instruments of oligarchy, perhaps more important than those on the right.

Man-made sea-level rises are due to global adjustments « JoNova: Science, carbon, climate and tax

Now of course, any one of these adjustments could be for very legitimate reasons and give us results closer to the truth. But the adjustments always bring data closer to the modeled trend. It’s decidedly non-random. Either there is a God who thinks teasing climate scientists is spiffy, or else there is something fishy going on, and some investigative journalists need to ask some investigative questions. Is that sea-level rise due to global warming or is it due to global adjustments?

THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Paul Ehrlich's 'population bomb' is now stone-cold dead

Look around you. For most nations of the world, birth and fertility rates have never fallen so far, so fast, so long, so surprisingly, all across the globe. Except for America.

Seen globally, the population explosion—or what Stanford's Paul Ehrlich called "the population bomb" in the 1960s—is now stone-cold dead. The ramifications are enormous economically, geopolitically, culturally and personally. For one, the United States will become stronger than ever in the games nations play.