The Paris Agreement- Wealth Redistribution Disguised as Climate Justice

Created in 2015, The Paris (Climate) Agreement is nothing more than a wealth redistribution scheme disguised as a climate justice program. The terms of the agreement make that apparent, and give credence to President Trump’s statement, “The European Union was formed in order to screw the United States. That’s the purpose of it. And they’ve done a good job of it.”

It’s a pretty safe bet that screwing the United States was not the primary goal in the formation of the European Union, but that has been the outcome as a consequence of its trade policies. A reading of The Paris Agreement leaves you with the impression that its policies employ extortion, rather than trade as an attempt to screw the United States.

The original Agreement, as well as subsequent “Conferences of Parties”, has been promoted as another UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) initiative to prevent the sky from falling and the seas from rising, as a result of climate change caused by human activities. Articles 2 and 4 do call for all nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, however, Paragraph 1 of article 9 states, “Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention.”

In Decision 1 of the Conference of Parties, 21^st session (Decision 1/CP.21) Paragraph 54 calls for a heavy financial commitment from all developed nations, not to address greenhouse gas emissions from signatory nations, but to give money to underdeveloped nations. It states, “Recognizes the importance of adequate and predictable financial resources” for implementing policies and incentives to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation”

Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?

Yes

No

Submit Vote

Note that nowhere in that statement is reference to using “financial resources” to reduce industrial carbon emissions. The “adequate and predictable financial resources”, are to be used for, “policy approaches and positive incentives for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation”.

These goals are essentially window dressing because Paragraph 53 of Decision1/CP.21 states, “prior to 2025 the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement shall set a new collective quantified goal from a floor of USD 100 billion per year, taking into account the needs and priorities of developing countries;”.

The Paris Agreement was created in Europe, which makes the specification of 100 billion US dollars, as opposed to Euros, a strong indication that the European Union signatory nations expected the United States to bear the bulk of the expense (just as we bear the majority of the costs for funding the United Nations) to fund its programs. Further, distribution of the $100 billion extorted annually from developed nations is determined by third parties, specifically, “the Green Climate Fund and the Global Environment Facility, the entities entrusted with the operation of the Financial Mechanism of the Convention”.

A check of the Green Climate Fund and Global Environment Facility websites reveals no specifics regarding accomplishments funded by participants of the Paris Climate Agreement. In fact, there is little more on these websites than preachings from the book of climate apocalypse, and notations that more money is needed to continue the sermons.

Noted geologist-explorer-investigator Randall Carlson, who has spent decades studying geomythology and climate over millennia puts the entire climate change argument in perspective. In one of his podcasts, he states, “We pulled out of the Paris Climate accords and a lot of people are upset about that, and I would like to reassure you that there is no reason to be upset. In fact, that was definitely the move to make. Why do I say that? Does that mean I’m a climate change denier because I’m in favor of pulling out of the climate accords? No, not at all. What it means is in fact just the opposite. I totally affirm that the climate of this planet changes, it changes regularly and frequently, it changes faster and a lot more severely than we have witnessed in our lifetimes….

“Primarily what it (The Paris Agreement) meant, and what the agenda was all about is a gigantic wealth transfer from the developed nations to the undeveloped nations, all done in the name of climate justice. In effect, what it is to me is a giant shakedown effort.”

With all the window dressing removed, the Paris Agreement requires the developed nations who signed on to collectively donate $100 billion to be given to undeveloped nations to plant new trees and to stop cutting down old ones. Knowing the corruption that exists in many countries- developed as well as undeveloped- there are two chances the funds will be used for their intended purpose- slim and none.