The much-ballyhooed global meeting of representatives of 192 +/- nations seeking so far elusive common ground on the issue of climate change got under way under a threatening cloud of doubt Monday. Some of these people strongly this is humanity’s last chance to stop global warming. The motive of some of these people is perhaps more sinister. Some, and perhaps many of them, are aiming at instituting a one-world government as part of the fallout from this supposed climate-change catastrophe cum hoax.

According to United Nations’ climate chief, Yvo de Boer, “The clock has ticked down to zero.” He was probably thinking at the time as much about the movement in public opinion away from the idea of global warming as about any man-made scientific deadline.

From now until December 18, delegates will try to knock out some of the most perplexing details in the pursuit of a global climate deal. Among those: getting some of the bigger polluters like the United States, China, and India to commit to deliver what could ultimately be hundreds of billions in financing to help the poor countries with their part in of problem. As always, of the three nations mentioned, only the United States is expected to actually pony up much money.

Several countries, including China, Brazil, the United States and most recently India and South Africa announced new emissions goals that are considered quite feeble by standards set by many of the climate control participants.

The global climate change meet-up started off with a slickly-produced video appeal from children around the world asking to be saved from what looked like an apocalyptic future. This regrettable video was intended to spur the participants to produce favorable results.

Connie Hedegaard, the Danish minister presiding over the conference speaking of the recent string of emissions commitments, said, “Every positive announcement will improve our changes of staying below the two-degree-Celsius target, but as we all know only too well,: she added, “we are not there yet.” Two degrees Celsius is the climate scientists recommended cap on temperature increases.

Miss Hedegaard went on to admit that the financing required to fund any emissions cut commitments will be the bigger challenge.

Rajendra K. Pachauri, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, had pointed remarks for those who “find it difficult to accept” climate change science after email messages and files allegedly stolen from a British climate research center recently raised questions about data manipulation among some leading climate scientists.

To counter bring our attention to those damning emails, Dr.Pachauri went on to point out a list of trends that suggest global warming.

The mood among negotiators and other participants was one of cautious optimism. The American, Jonathan Pershing, the State Department’s special envoy for climate said at the opening plenary session that he saw strong evidence the conference would prove critical to moving forward on curbing emissions and helping poor countries limit vulnerability to climate hazards. He was certain the decision by more than 100 leaders, including President Obama, to attend would give their efforts a strong boost.

He also said he saw no indication that efforts could be blunted by Saudi Arabia and other countries that have raised concerns about climate findings based on the e-mail scandal.

The environmental group, Friends of the Earth, sent an open letter that condemned what it called “undemocratic practices adopted by the Danish presidency of convening small and exclusive groups of countries before the Copenhagen meeting”—a reference to the rumored existence of an “alternate” treaty document being readied by some big players in the negotiations, including conference organizers, should efforts to sort out differences on the current text prove undoable.

Other blocs — including China — are rumored to be working on similar alternative documents of their own.

Meanwhile, in what appeared to be an unprecedented action, 50 or so newspapers around the world published the identical editorials calling for “decisive action” in Copenhagen.

“In scientific journals the question is no longer whether humans are to blame, but how little time we have got left to limit the damage,” read the editorial, spearheaded by Britain’s Guardian newspaper. “Yet so far the world’s response has been feeble and half-hearted.”

Continued inaction, the authors asserted, would ravage the planet and wreak havoc on economies and livelihoods.

“The politicians in Copenhagen have the power to shape history’s judgment on this generation. . . .” In conclusion the editorial added, “We implore them to make the right choice.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Meeting on Climate Opens With Calls for Urgent Action (nytimes.com)
• Copenhagen climate summit: UN warns of damage over hacked emails (telegraph.co.uk)
• Climate at turning point, says official (thestar.com)
• Copenhagen climate summit: who’s who (telegraph.co.uk)
• `Time is up’ on climate talks, UN says (thestar.com)