Military Review

Russian veto on draft resolution on climate and security at UN called "anachronism", regrettable

112

Vasily Nebenzya - Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the UN Security Council



The United States, Britain and a number of other countries sharply criticized the Russian Federation after voting on the draft UN Security Council resolution "On Climate and Security". The project was introduced by Niger and Ireland and involved taking measures against global climate change, "leading ultimately to an increase in the number of conflicts in different parts of the world." The authors of the draft resolution pointed out that global warming leads to an increase in the level of the world ocean, which in turn affects security in the world.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres announced that it is global warming that is behind the conflicts in the world, as well as behind the growing number of the poor.

113 UN countries supported the draft resolution, including 12 of the 15 members of the Security Council. Russian representatives in the UN Security Council voted against, noting that the authors of the draft resolution, for some unknown reason, suddenly decided to link a set of measures to combat climate change with global security issues.

The experts noted that there was an impression that the authors of the project wanted to legitimize possible interference in the affairs of foreign states through the existence of a document on “combating climate change”. Otherwise, why confuse climate change with issues of armed and political conflicts ...

India also opposed the project. The PRC representatives decided to abstain.

As a result, the veto did not allow the UN Security Council to adopt the said draft resolution.

Irish Permanent Representative to the UN Geraldine Nason said of "deep regret" over the veto, arguing that if not for it, the resolution "would be the first small step to understand the consequences of global climate change." J. Nason called the Russian veto "a blatant anachronism, regrettable."

US Permanent Representative to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield said that the Russian position "did not allow the main regulator in the world to solve the most important problem related to climate change." It turns out that climate cannot be separated from security issues, she said.

Thomas-Greenfield:

This is a security crisis.

Representatives of Britain at the United Nations also criticized Russia, saying that the Russian position is regrettable, "since it does not allow better informing the world community about the relationship between climate and security issues."

Russia proposes to consider these issues separately, as they say, separating "flies from cutlets."

The representative of China noted that attempts to combine the problems of global warming with conflicts arising in various regions look strange:

It is better to advise the Security Council in this case not to engage in political shows.
112 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Cool but not Igor
    Cool but not Igor 14 December 2021 06: 24
    -39
    In order to discuss something on this topic, you need to understand the issue deeper, and so I'm just the first wink
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 06: 31
      +11
      Quote: Cool but not Igor
      In order to discuss something on this topic, you need to understand the issue deeper, and so I'm just the first

      This achievement should be celebrated! You understand what. wink
      1. alex neym_2
        alex neym_2 14 December 2021 06: 45
        +9
        It is necessary to note the obvious effect of warming in the Arctic on the "worthy" minds of Naglich and Irish people, which leads to brain thinning. What will they sing when the Gulf Stream changes direction, as their own scientists predict?
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 06: 46
          +3
          Quote: aleks neym_2
          What will they sing when the Gulf Stream changes direction
          They wheeze with a cold, through the snotty rolls! laughing
        2. Starover_Z
          Starover_Z 14 December 2021 11: 01
          +12
          Quote: aleks neym_2
          It is necessary to note the obvious effect of warming in the Arctic on the "worthy" minds of Naglich and Irish people, which leads to brain thinning.

          This is one of the official reasons. But in general, I think someone wanted through the UN and this resolution to prohibit Russia from developing minerals and developing the Northern Sea Route, as if it would melt the Arctic.
          1. alex neym_2
            alex neym_2 14 December 2021 13: 49
            +3
            And I’m talking about this: Russia is developing the Arctic at full speed and POSTS its territory behind itself. How do you know / read - ice class! Mattress toppers still do not have SUCH category of ships / vessels! So they go crazy with powerlessness, they somehow do not have the opportunity to resist the Ice Fleet of Russia ... and, probably, for a long time ..
            1. Vladimir Mashkov
              Vladimir Mashkov 14 December 2021 17: 40
              +2
              Quote: aleks neym_2
              So they go crazy with powerlessness ...

              ... and are trying, under a plausible pretext, to stretch out a rotten project, hiding behind which it will be possible to spoil Russia. And rightly, Nebenzya vetoed and said that one should not accept stupidity about the connection between white and sour, that is, global warming affecting security in the world. Separately - you are always welcome! laughing
            2. The comment was deleted.
        3. 1Alexey
          1Alexey 14 December 2021 17: 03
          +3
          Quote: aleks neym_2
          What will they sing when the Gulf Stream changes direction

          Most likely, they will blame Russia for everything.
      2. Pereira
        Pereira 14 December 2021 09: 43
        +1
        This achievement should be celebrated! You understand what
        The best thing is to go to bed again.
      3. SKVichyakow
        SKVichyakow 14 December 2021 09: 58
        +11
        And I always thought that wars were unleashed by the United States, and the climate was changing due to the number of solar flares.
    2. Real Pilot
      Real Pilot 14 December 2021 07: 14
      +27
      "Drown with coal? Then we fly to you!"
      “Have you decided to build a nuclear power plant?
      Bomb and punish ...

      The resolution was blocked correctly. I recall the term "humanitarian bombing" (based on an article by Vaclav Havel of 1999 on Yugoslavia).
      That is, from coercion to peace, one can go to coercion to abandon industry ...
      Such approaches are a distortion of the mandate of the UN Security Council, its unjustified expansion into the area of ​​free interpretation of world events. Security is an accurate term, its dilution will only reduce the already not very high efficiency of the Security Council, where the question of war and peace should be discussed.
    3. alex neym_2
      alex neym_2 14 December 2021 13: 57
      +1
      At the end, they said the truth ...
  2. Serg Kam
    Serg Kam 14 December 2021 06: 25
    -17
    It is interesting to read the entire text of the resolution, I do not want to be like it: "I have not read it, but I condemn it."
    In fact, climate change is indeed causing an increase in the number of conflicts. The same great migration of peoples was also caused by climatic changes. And then it ended with the fall of the Roman Empire.
    But it is also not worthwhile to absolutize the influence of climate.
  3. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 06: 29
    +16
    Linda Thomas-Greenfield said that the Russian position "did not allow the main regulator in the world to solve the most important problem related to climate change issues."
    And if volcanoes are the main supplier of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, then these countries where they operate will come under the control of the UN, not otherwise?
    1. NDR-791
      NDR-791 14 December 2021 06: 36
      +12
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      And if volcanoes are the main supplier of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, then these countries where they operate will come under the control of the UN, not otherwise?

      For a couple of years already, THEY have considered forest fires in Russia to be the main supplier of greenhouse gases. So they act accordingly. Unambiguously, if global Britain is unhappy, then there is a catch. And Niger and Ireland are the initiators on this matter - it's not even funny.
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 06: 39
        -14
        Quote: NDR-791
        For a couple of years already, THEY have considered forest fires in Russia to be the main supplier of greenhouse gases.
        Since our authorities listen more to the "partners" than to the population (this was the case anyway), this is good, they will pay more attention to forest protection, at whose expense it is really unclear.
    2. riwas
      riwas 14 December 2021 06: 41
      +1
      In two ways. However, scientists are in a hurry to whitewash the volcanoes. Volcanic activity is not only pushing the planet towards climate disaster, the researchers said. It turns out that volcanoes have the ability to capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, thereby curbing global warming.
      This happens due to weathering processes. Weathering is the most common phenomenon. Due to it, rocks are gradually destroyed, and minerals and chemical elements enter the circulating waters. Among those who are carried away by rivers into the oceans are magnesium and calcium. In the oceans, they form chemical compounds with the ability to capture CO2.
      Thus, volcanoes, on the one hand, emit carbon dioxide, and on the other, they are destroyed, eroded, thereby facilitating the binding of CO2.
      https://www.meteo-tv.ru/news/Ecology/Vulkany-za-izmenenie-klimata-ili-protiv-Razbiraemsya-/
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 06: 45
        +6
        Quote: riwas
        This happens due to weathering processes. Weathering is the most common phenomenon.
        I will not reject outright, but something suggests that the weathering process is long, even sooo long, but the eruptions are very intense and transient!
        1. riwas
          riwas 14 December 2021 06: 49
          +4
          I will not reject outright, but something suggests that the weathering process is long, even sooo long, but the eruptions are very intense and transient!

          Eruptions are rare, and weathering occurs constantly. In addition, ash ejected at great heights blocks the light.
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 06: 51
            0
            Quote: riwas
            Eruptions are rare, and weathering occurs constantly. In addition, ash ejected at great heights blocks the light.

            Or like this. However, the cold snap passes quickly, two or three years, according to Krakatoa's experience, and the gaziks remain. tongue
      2. vadimtt
        vadimtt 14 December 2021 08: 24
        +6
        Strange research. Paleontologists will not agree with them, otherwise all theories of the development of life on Earth go to the forest wassat
    3. Serg Kam
      Serg Kam 14 December 2021 06: 52
      -22
      And if volcanoes are the main supplier of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere


      Climate change denial is promoted by the oil and gas companies that generate the most carbon emissions. In addition, this point of view is often defended by big business and conservative research centers (primarily in the United States). The billionaire Koch brothers, who made their fortune in oil refining, spent about $ 1997 million to support climate skeptics between 2018 and 145.

      And the oil giant Exxon Mobil, until recently, in its public statements systematically downplayed the importance of climate change, and also paid researchers for false data.

      Come on, stand up for the interests of American business.

      And do not care that the Russian Academy of Sciences has long been saying that volcanoes have little effect, and that the basis of climate change is an anthropogenic factor.
      1. NDR-791
        NDR-791 14 December 2021 07: 07
        +8
        Quote: SergKam
        Come on, stand up for the interests of American business.

        Nope, wrong message. Let's say they adopt this resolution and others like it, do you think that the aforementioned oil giants will realize and self-destruct? Something tells me that neither American nor British giants are being liquidated. How is BP doing that almost stopped the Gulf Stream in the Gulf of Mexico? And nothing, blooms and smells.
        1. Serg Kam
          Serg Kam 14 December 2021 07: 12
          -18
          Nope, wrong message. Let's say they adopt this resolution and others like it, do you think that the aforementioned oil giants will realize and self-destruct?

          Have you read this resolution?
          Or "I have not read, but I condemn"?
          I do not know what was said in the resolution, but I know that the Academy of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences consider the anthropogenic factor to be the main cause of climate change.
          But the Anglo-Saxon oil companies, on the contrary, pay money to those who say that volcanoes are to blame.
          1. NDR-791
            NDR-791 14 December 2021 07: 16
            +13
            Quote: SergKam
            the Academy of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences consider the anthropogenic factor to be the main cause of climate change.

            I totally agree with you !!! Especially in the light of statistics, it is clearly obtained. In the United States, there are 1000 cars per 850 population, in Russia there are 300. Those who crap more, let them reduce consumption. That's all. And there is nothing to stretch the owl over the whole globe, stretch it on a separate "hegemon" and immediately the air on the planet will become cleaner. But no - they want to demand from us, not from themselves.
            1. Serg Kam
              Serg Kam 14 December 2021 07: 23
              -14
              Especially in the light of statistics, it is clearly obtained. In the US, there are 1000 cars per 850 population.


              Once again: I answered the statement that volcanoes are the main source of carbon dioxide.
              This statement is the invention of the Anglo-Saxon oil companies.
              Why there are so many defenders of the Anglo-Saxons in Russia is not clear to me.
              On the contrary, the Russians should declare that man is changing the climate, and demand that the Americans restrict industry, and not allow them to blame everything on volcanoes.
              1. Glory1974
                Glory1974 14 December 2021 09: 08
                +4
                Russians must declare that man is changing the climate,

                The data on what influences the climate varies. Some scientists say that a person, others that natural factors.
                Why should Russians believe in some and not believe in others?
                1. Serg Kam
                  Serg Kam 14 December 2021 09: 41
                  -4
                  Why should Russians believe in some and not believe in others?

                  It is logical that Russians should trust the Russian Academy of Sciences.
                  Here's an example:
                  RAS Corresponding Member Vladimir SEMENOV noted that modern warming has been taking place since the 70s - for 50 years. And in general, since the beginning of the century, the temperature, if we take the lowest values ​​of the beginning of the century and modern values, has increased by 1.3 degrees. "This is how the global temperature has risen"
                  The scientist emphasized that climate changes have been noted throughout the entire history of mankind. “The Earth has existed for 4,5 billion years, there have been both warming and cooling during this history, but there have never been such rapid changes. The temperature over the last thousand years has dropped by about 1 degree - about the same as it has warmed in just over the last hundred years, ”said Vladimir Semyonov.
                  http://www.ras.ru/news/shownews.aspx?id=3bea1f39-a680-4a2a-97b2-f7102cf955b9

                  Speaking about the anthropogenic influence, the researcher noted that earlier we knew about the influence of greenhouse gases on the energy balance of the Earth using theoretical models and indirect results. For the past 20 years, there have been direct satellite measurements of heat balance outside the Earth. “We see how much more heat is captured by the earth as a result of greenhouse gases,” noted Vladimir Semyonov.

                  Vladimir Semyonov: “I would like to voice some fundamental concepts that are often used, but are absolutely incorrect. The first of them is that the theory of anthropogenic warming was created to inflate the climate agenda to the scale of a global problem with the political goal of maintaining and strengthening the dominance of economies developed countries, and to contain the economies of competing countries. This is completely wrong: the first results that physicists received in the field of the theory of the greenhouse effect were obtained back in the XNUMXth century. "
                  1. Glory1974
                    Glory1974 14 December 2021 10: 17
                    +4
                    It is logical that Russians should trust the Russian Academy of Sciences.

                    even in the Russian Academy of Sciences there is no unity on this issue. Scientists hold opposite opinions. There are no scientific calculations to take into account the anthropogenic or natural factor. No one can tell how many degrees the temperature will rise or fall next year. The weather can be more or less accurately predicted for 3-5 days, but what can we say about the weather for decades to come? Nobody can know.
                    1. Serg Kam
                      Serg Kam 14 December 2021 11: 14
                      -5
                      even in the Russian Academy of Sciences there is no unity on this issue. Scientists hold opposite opinions.

                      Proofs will be?
                      Who in the Russian Academy of Sciences says otherwise?
                      Can I have links, publications?
                      1. Glory1974
                        Glory1974 14 December 2021 13: 11
                        +3
                        Proofs will be?
                        Who in the Russian Academy of Sciences says otherwise?

                        Will there be proofs that everyone in the Academy of Sciences thinks the same way? wassat
                        There are always different schools and different directions in science, and people who are engaged in science always have their own scientifically grounded view of the problem.
                        See the weather forecast. The weather is predicted for 3-5 days. This is what scientists - meteorologists say. Now tell me how you can predict the weather for 20 years.
                      2. Serg Kam
                        Serg Kam 14 December 2021 14: 06
                        -2
                        Will there be proofs that everyone in the Academy of Sciences thinks the same way?

                        When there is nothing to say, as expected, they fell into demagoguery. Thank you, everything is clear.
                      3. Glory1974
                        Glory1974 14 December 2021 13: 23
                        0
                        Geophysicist Alexander Gorodnitsky writes: "In 10-15 years, we will not face global warming, but, on the contrary, a global cooling similar to the one that already occurred in Europe at the beginning of the XNUMXth century."


                        In another "fifteen hundred years, and the next ice age will begin on Earth," says the famous climatologist, 88-year-old Vladimir Kotlyakov, and warns that a global cooling may happen much earlier - in 10-15 years.
                      4. Serg Kam
                        Serg Kam 14 December 2021 14: 08
                        -2
                        Geophysicist Alexander Gorodnitsky writes

                        past.
                        Alexander Gorodnitsky is an academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences.
                        The public organization "Russian Academy of Natural Sciences" has nothing to do with the Russian Academy of Sciences and is criticized by the scientific community
                      5. Glory1974
                        Glory1974 15 December 2021 14: 12
                        0
                        Gorodnitsky by, and the other? And predict the weather for 20 years? Or all? Blown away?
                      6. Serg Kam
                        Serg Kam 17 December 2021 03: 45
                        0
                        And predict the weather for 20 years? Or all?

                        “In 10-15 years, we will not face global warming, but, on the contrary, a global cooling similar to the one that already occurred in Europe at the beginning of the XNUMXth century.”

                        Well, in 10-15 years we will see who was right.
                        In the meantime, stock up on quilted jackets to survive the ice age.
                2. telobezumnoe
                  telobezumnoe 17 December 2021 00: 03
                  0
                  and that scientists, you can see for yourself the statistics of the carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere, see in what ways it has been possible to follow this over the millennia, for example, by the ice cores of Antarctica or Greenland, by the way, volcanic eruptions can be seen there, and then think about why for the last two centuries it suddenly doubled, and yes there were volcanoes in the pre-industrial era. for this you do not need to be a scientist, and draw conclusions yourself, and not imaginary authorities
      2. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 07: 08
        +5
        Quote: SergKam
        Climate change denial is promoted by the oil and gas companies that generate the most carbon emissions. In addition, this point of view is often defended by big business and conservative research centers (primarily in the United States).

        However, the proposal was put forward by the Permanent Representative of the United States, and a veto was imposed by the Permanent Representative of Russia.

        Quote: SergKam
        And do not care that the Russian Academy of Sciences has long been saying that volcanoes have little effect, and that the basis of climate change is an anthropogenic factor.
        Personally for you?
        1. Serg Kam
          Serg Kam 14 December 2021 07: 19
          -16
          Personally for you?

          Here is an interview with the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences

          human activity provoked that the temperature went up. And now, it is possible, our planet is entering a state that it has never experienced before. And how much she will be able to adapt to new processes is still a question.

          Read on WWW.KP.RU: https://www.kp.ru/daily/27089.5/4161595/

          And you continue to support the Anglo-Saxon oil companies
          1. Pechkin
            Pechkin 14 December 2021 07: 29
            +3
            And you continue to support the Anglo-Saxon oil companies
            And what has to do with the support of Western oil companies. Not only Western companies will restrict, and what alternative do you propose.
            1. Serg Kam
              Serg Kam 14 December 2021 07: 33
              -15
              and here is the support of Western oil companies.

              Once again, claims that the main source of carbon dioxide is emitted by volcanoes was invented by Anglo-Saxon oil companies, actively promoted and paid by the Anglo-Saxons.
              The Russian Academy of Sciences says that the human factor is the main cause of climate change.

              Here is an interview with the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
              http://www.ras.ru/news/shownews.aspx?id=457f4adc-65d8-4b1a-8a4c-76f7659cbbc7
              1. Kerensky
                Kerensky 14 December 2021 09: 33
                +1
                Once again, claims that the main source of carbon dioxide is emitted by volcanoes was invented by Anglo-Saxon oil companies, actively promoted and paid by the Anglo-Saxons.

                And they are "enemies of the communists" (C)
          2. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 08: 17
            +4
            And what do we see on the link, what words?
            Annual temperature variations can be attributed to different reasons, but it is important that there is a strong warming trend, supported by natural factors. It is possible that
            even if we turn off all anthropogenic activity now
            (factories that emit air emissions will stop working), then we will still observe warming. Perhaps our Earth has entered a self-sustaining mode of such a spin.


            No, below there are of course such words
            We cool down a little bit but human activity provoked somethingthat the temperature went up.
            But the same thing was broadcast about the horrors of the ozone layer, only there were freon refrigerators-killers. wink
            1. Serg Kam
              Serg Kam 14 December 2021 08: 23
              -7
              human activity provoked that the temperature went up.

              supported by natural factors

              You yourself will be able to formulate what is the main thing - provoked, and what is secondary - supports?

              then we will still observe warming.

              Of course, nobody canceled the domino effect.
              Only the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences just says that the anthropogenic factor has pushed the first knuckle.
              1. Vladimir_2U
                Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 08: 25
                -1
                Quote: SergKam
                You yourself will be able to formulate what is the main thing - provoked, and what is secondary - supports?
                The order of the phrases from the article, firstly, and secondly
                Quote: SergKam
                Only the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences just says that the anthropogenic factor has pushed the first knuckle.
                he says this without proof. Much like the ozone layer.
                1. Serg Kam
                  Serg Kam 14 December 2021 08: 27
                  -6
                  he says this without proof.

                  The President of the Russian Academy of Sciences says unsubstantiated ???
                  It is clear that there is no point in talking further.
                  Good luck in further protecting the Anglo-Saxon oil lobby!
                  1. Vladimir_2U
                    Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 08: 44
                    0
                    Quote: SergKam
                    Good luck in further protecting the Anglo-Saxon oil lobby!

                    Thank you, can you protect the interests of Gazprom and Rosneft? And then "BP" and "Shell" delay payments, then ours can throw on the card "Mir", you see and interrupt until the dollars come! laughing laughing
                    1. Serg Kam
                      Serg Kam 14 December 2021 08: 51
                      -2
                      ours can throw it on the "Mir" card, you look and I will interrupt until the dollars come!


                      ExxonMobil distributed $ 2,9 million last year to 39 groups that society believes are distorting the science of climate change.

                      In 2004, the institute, together with the British Science Alliance, published a report claiming that the rise in global temperature was not associated with rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

                      https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2006/sep/20/oilandpetrol.business
                      1. Vladimir_2U
                        Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 08: 55
                        -1
                        Quote: SergKam
                        ExxonMobil distributed $ 2,9 million last year

                        These owe me too, look!

                        Quote: SergKam
                        In 2004, the institute, together with the British Science Alliance, published a report claiming that the rise in global temperature was not associated with rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
                        Well, honestly, your dear president does not talk about CO2 either, he talks about methane.
                  2. minus
                    minus 14 December 2021 11: 30
                    +2
                    And many climate professors and academics say the opposite. For me, they are more authoritative sources than the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Although he is an academician, his specialization is optics, plasma, lasers. Excuse me, but will you go to the dentist to treat hemorrhoids? Also a doctor according to your logic)))
                    1. Serg Kam
                      Serg Kam 14 December 2021 14: 19
                      -1
                      many more professors and academics working on the climate say the opposite.

                      Will there be proofs? To the opposite. From professors and academics?

                      I can provide a bunch of proofs:
                      For example, the scientific director of the Institute of Global Climate and Ecology named after Yu.A. Izrael, Professor Sergei Mikhailovich Semyonov
                      It also speaks about the anthropogenic factor.

                      https://scientificrussia.ru/articles/akademiki-ran-o-mirovoj-probleme-klimata
                      1. minus
                        minus 15 December 2021 15: 51
                        0
                        Vladimir Mikhailovich Kotlyakov (born November 6, 1931, Krasnaya Polyana settlement, Moscow region) - Soviet and Russian geographer and glaciologist, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences (1991), Honored Geographer of the Russian Federation (2020). Scientific director of the Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences (since 2015), where he has been working since 1954, its director in 1986—2015. Honorary President of the Russian Geographical Society (since 2000, vice president from 1980–2000). One of the founders and leader of the modern glaciological scientific school in Russia [4] [5]. Doctor of Geography, Professor. Is this person not an authority for you? Or this one is Alexander Moiseevich Gorodnitsky, Doctor of Geological and Mineralogical Sciences, Professor, Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation. I'm not going to throw you links to articles and interviews of a huge number of people whose scientific activities are directly related to the issue under discussion. The list is too big.
                      2. Serg Kam
                        Serg Kam 17 December 2021 03: 39
                        +1
                        Vladimir Mikhailovich Kotlyakov

                        I agree on it - it really recognizes global warming, but against the anthropogenic factor. Although he admits that for 400 thousand years CO2 has never risen above 300 points.
                        Well, we'll see in 10 years who is right: Corresponding Member Semyonov, or Academician Kotlyar
          3. vadimtt
            vadimtt 14 December 2021 08: 26
            +2
            Every year RAS more and more resembles RANS wassat
            Laughter through tears, alas ...
      3. paul3390
        paul3390 14 December 2021 07: 32
        +6
        volcanoes have little effect, and the basis of climate change is an anthropogenic factor

        Only in the written history of mankind has the climate changed back and forth .. And over the last million years - from hippos in England to a glacier in Nice. And so several times. And note - the Neanderthals seem to have nothing to do with it. About earlier times, I generally keep quiet - there the temperature on the planet jumped like a flea on a dog.

        How much is it now - man is to blame for the type of warming?
        1. Serg Kam
          Serg Kam 14 December 2021 07: 36
          -10
          How much is it now - man is to blame for the type of warming?

          Because it burns fossil fuels by gigatons per year.
          Read the interview of the academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, I have already thrown the link.
          Or are you one of those who deny Russian science?
          1. paul3390
            paul3390 14 December 2021 07: 42
            +9
            I deny this nonsense. It doesn't matter what origin. Let's say 15 million years ago - it was even warmer than it is now. Without any person.

            1. Serg Kam
              Serg Kam 14 December 2021 07: 55
              -8
              Let's say 15 million years ago - it was even warmer than it is now.

              AND? What does this prove?
              And 300 million was even warmer - only a person cannot breathe and live in such conditions.

              Research by our and non-our glaciologists say that the last 400 thousand years, the carbon dioxide content did not exceed 300 points.
              For some reason, the last century has begun to grow and has already passed 420. Who is to blame for this?
              1. paul3390
                paul3390 14 December 2021 08: 07
                +7
                Stop raving. That's carbon dioxide.



                Average CO2021 concentration reached 2 ppm in May 419, according to the Mauna Loa Weather Observatory
                At the turn of the Eocene and Oligocene (34 million years ago - the beginning of the formation of the modern Antarctic ice sheet), the amount of CO2 was 760 ppm.
                Allows you to determine very high CO2 concentrations in the past, which 150-200 million years ago were 3 ppm (000%)

                Low CO2 levels for the past million years are more likely related to ocean temperatures associated with the Ice Age. So - the influence of a person on this parameter has not been proven by anything. And before us, the percentages jumped - wow ..
                1. Serg Kam
                  Serg Kam 14 December 2021 08: 15
                  -8
                  Allows you to determine very high CO2 concentrations in the past, which 150-200 million years ago were 3 ppm (000%)


                  Once again: what has it got to do with millions of years ago?

                  Let's take a look at the last 400 years, when the carbon content did not rise above 300.
                  Why has it skyrocketed over the last century? There must be a reason?

                  Average CO2021 concentration reached 2 ppm in May 419, according to the Mauna Loa Weather Observatory

                  Where did this increase come from?
          2. paul3390
            paul3390 14 December 2021 07: 45
            +9
            Here's another example ..

            1. Serg Kam
              Serg Kam 14 December 2021 08: 06
              -10
              Here's another example ..

              Again.
              All previous changes took hundreds of thousands of years.
              And now, over 100 years, there are global changes.
              Four hundred thousand years before us, the climate was stable, but over the first century it has changed and continues to change. How so? Who is the culprit?

              And in general, why such confidence that SAME events cannot have DIFFERENT causes?
              An exaggerated example: if a cat steals a piece of sausage from my table, will the dog never touch the second piece of sausage? So according to your logic? Give the dog an indulgence right away, or if the second piece of sausage is missing, is it still worth seeing who is in the kitchen?
              1. paul3390
                paul3390 14 December 2021 08: 11
                +8
                Four hundred thousand years before us, the climate was stable

                Stop finally. Learn history! For example, the fall of the Ancient Kingdom of Egypt - a gigantic drought in as much as 200 years. It's the same in Mesopotamia. And such leaps in our history - above the roof. Without any industry. The Sahara had a thriving savanna and hippopotamus lakes 10000 years ago. And now? We have never had a stable climate.

                Some of the fluctuations in the ice age are worth something - the interglacial and rhinos in England, then the glacier and in Italy -40. During those last types, stable 400 years.
                1. Serg Kam
                  Serg Kam 14 December 2021 08: 17
                  -8
                  For example, the fall of the Ancient Kingdom of Egypt - a gigantic drought in as much as 200 years

                  What does drought have to do with it ???
                  The carbon content has been stable for the last 400 thousand years - our glaciologists did not analyze the cores of Antarctica for nothing.
          3. Pechkin
            Pechkin 14 December 2021 07: 49
            +3
            Because it burns fossil fuels by gigatons per year.
            It is understandable that people burn hydrocarbons and ... Emissions are already being reduced. Once again, what alternative do you propose, or for all the good, against all the bad.
            1. Serg Kam
              Serg Kam 14 December 2021 08: 10
              -7
              Once again, what alternative do you suggest

              The simplest thing is to calculate who dumped how much carbon and demand to compensate for emissions.
              Americans have 2 cars per family - let them pay.
              If China wants to open 100 new coal stations, let it pay.
              Russia has built a nuclear power plant - no emissions, it passes by.
              What's so hard about that?
              1. Vladimir_2U
                Vladimir_2U 14 December 2021 08: 33
                +2
                Quote: SergKam
                The simplest thing is to calculate who dumped how much carbon and demand to compensate for emissions.
                Americans have 2 cars per family - let them pay.

                Well, this is nonsense! Well, they will pay with freshly printed candy wrappers, and the resources are then tyutyu. Absolutely not an option. And this is subject to belief in anthropogenic causes of warming, but there is no evidence - there is no belief.
                1. Serg Kam
                  Serg Kam 14 December 2021 08: 37
                  -5
                  Well, they will pay with freshly printed candy wrappers,

                  And who said that to pay with candy wrappers? Let them pay with carbon capture plants.
                  Let them pay with an adsorbent.
              2. Pechkin
                Pechkin 14 December 2021 09: 07
                +2
                The simplest thing is to calculate who dumped how much carbon and demand to compensate for emissions.
                You want to invent a new version of the Kyoto Protocollaughing with the same efficiency. Trading in quotas for greenhouse gas emissions is still there, only this is a voluntary matter. And who will pay, who will demand.
                Americans have 2 cars per family - let them pay.
                And the eco standards for new cars in Russia are the same, we will take into account (btr82 for how many cars we will count). The Russian industry thinks the most environmentally friendly in the world (for one Norilsk Nickel in Europe it would be planted for 100500 years) and we are the second largest oil production in the world.
                If China wants to open 100 new coal stations, let it pay.
                And in developing countries that raise their energy should pay as China, the United States, Russia?
                What's so hard about that?
                Not just difficult, but very difficult. Until they come up with an economically viable alternative to hydrocarbons, nothing will change.
              3. paul3390
                paul3390 14 December 2021 09: 42
                +4
                The simplest thing is to calculate who dumped how much carbon, and demand to compensate for emissions.

                How? Generally, CO2 is not so bad for the planet - the higher its content, the more intensively the forests grow. So - the only possible payment for the emission is to force the planting of new trees according to the nasty. And - to reduce the felling of existing ones. Then - they themselves will process the excess carbon. And money - it won't affect it in any way ..
                1. Serg Kam
                  Serg Kam 14 December 2021 09: 45
                  -3
                  And money - it won't affect it in any way ..


                  Now read my message and look for the word "money" there.

                  The simplest thing is to calculate who dumped how much carbon, and demand to compensate for emissions.
      4. Avior
        Avior 14 December 2021 11: 18
        +2
        Climate change denial is promoted by oil and gas companies

        promising start.
        Come on, stand up for the interests of American business.

        and a strange continuation. Do you think that oil and gas companies are only in the States?
  4. Pavel73
    Pavel73 14 December 2021 06: 39
    +3
    An attempt to draw politics to the climate. Use the climate as a cover for your political ambitions.
  5. Polite Moose
    Polite Moose 14 December 2021 06: 42
    +9
    If they criticize us, then we are doing everything right.
  6. Free wind
    Free wind 14 December 2021 06: 47
    -12
    The climate is changing and there is no getting away from it. The number of natural disasters is increasing. That droughts, where they have never been. first floods, then snow piled above the village council. You need to negotiate. At one time, we agreed to reduce the production of freon, the problem with ozone holes seems to have been resolved.
    1. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 14 December 2021 06: 59
      +14
      Ozone holes were also invented to restrict production in some countries ... you can crush competitors and in this way invent ozone holes, global warming, aliens and other whims of nature ... it's not a fact that humanity is to blame here.
    2. paul3390
      paul3390 14 December 2021 09: 46
      +2
      You read the authors of the times of the fall of the Roman Empire - they describe the same thing .. And we also had during the Time of Troubles, the classic 7 lean years. The planet's climate jumped ALWAYS.
  7. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 14 December 2021 06: 56
    +4
    What can I say ... what Anglo-Saxon crooks have settled on their favorite horse ... Russia is again to blame ... now in the alleged global warming.
  8. faiver
    faiver 14 December 2021 06: 58
    +9
    UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres announced that it is global warming that is behind the conflicts in the world, as well as behind the growing number of the poor.
    - as for me, Mr. General Secretary is overheated ...
    MONEY is always behind conflicts in the world, and the growing number of poor in the world is associated with the same ... hi
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. 1Alexey
      1Alexey 14 December 2021 17: 24
      +2
      Quote: faiver
      UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres announced that it is global warming that is behind the conflicts in the world, as well as behind the growing number of the poor.
      - as for me, Mr. General Secretary is overheated ...
      MONEY is always behind conflicts in the world, and the growing number of poor in the world is associated with the same ... hi

      As the saying goes: "see the root"!

      If the warming is to blame for the conflicts and the increase in the number of the poor, and Russia is to blame for the warming (this is by definition), then Russia is the main villain on the planet, eliminating which there will be neither conflicts nor the poor.

      The minds are being processed to justify a future war!
  9. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 14 December 2021 07: 04
    +4
    They make a fool of our brother with this warming, especially with the rise in the ocean level. They say warming, but like today in the South Urals they promise -44. pour them a tub of cold sea water over their heads (- 2 freezing temperatures, and if the water from the Dead Sea is probably 5 -7) Conflict resolution will be cheap and angry.
    1. vadimtt
      vadimtt 14 December 2021 08: 30
      +2
      Before each ice age, there was a short-term warming ... laughing
  10. demo
    demo 14 December 2021 07: 09
    +10
    As soon as the conversation about the climate comes up, a girl, Greta Thunberg, immediately appears before the inner eye.
    .
    And you understand - the topic of climate is in such hands that one should stay away from their owner. As far as possible.
    1. aszzz888
      aszzz888 14 December 2021 07: 28
      +2
      She was diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome (a mild form of autism spectrum disorder), obsessive-compulsive disorder, and selective mutism. Greta considers Asperger's Syndrome a "gift" that defines her vision of the world, in contrast to the majority, in "very black and white."
      Everything is very simple and capitalistic - adding oil to the fire, this girl with her family, they don't have a dough for that.
      1. Lech from Android.
        Lech from Android. 14 December 2021 07: 34
        +2
        And where is the line on which this girl will stop ... what who knows what else will climb into her plague head ... they went completely crazy there in Europe.
        1. aszzz888
          aszzz888 14 December 2021 09: 23
          +2

          Lech from Android. (Lech from Android)
          Today, 07: 34
          NEW

          +1
          And where is the line on which this girl will stop ... what who knows what else will climb into her plague head ... they went completely crazy there in Europe.
          Nobody knows how and where the next time the not very healthy will learn
        2. demo
          demo 14 December 2021 15: 08
          +2
          Neither the girl, nor her mother, none of those who "trample the earth below" have nothing to do with making decisions.
          This is decided by other people and is happening elsewhere.
          Tomorrow (conditionally) this girl will be attracted to some other PR action.
          And maybe they will not attract, in general and never.
          "Entertainers and wizards" both in the EU and in the US have such "textured material", such a motley collective of actors and actresses, that we never dreamed of.
          So the intrigue persists.
          But! Only for those who are interested in watching their performances.
          Everything that is connected with them is disgusting to me.
      2. tralflot1832
        tralflot1832 14 December 2021 08: 44
        +2
        It seems that the capitalization of Greta's family is estimated at $ 3 billion, that's what it means not to go to school! wassat
        1. aszzz888
          aszzz888 14 December 2021 09: 21
          +3

          tralflot1832 (Andrey S.)
          Today, 08: 44
          NEW

          +1
          It seems that the capitalization of Greta's family is estimated at $ 3 billion, that's what it means not to go to school! wassat
          Yes, yes. In the media there was such an assessment of the "activity" of the girl.
  11. unhappy
    unhappy 14 December 2021 07: 14
    +4
    I have always said that many people suffer from overestimated self-esteem. Man is the king of nature, they say. But in fact - a pimple on the skin of an elephant (Earth).
    Climatic changes occur constantly and human influence is greatly exaggerated, someone muddies the waters and calls them Naglo-Saxons)
  12. Two
    Two 14 December 2021 07: 16
    +2
    And somehow it is not customary to remember the leak of an unknown amount of oil in the Gulf of Mexico due to the fault of American operators during the Obama period of "splendor." The port of Murmansk began "periodically" (regularly!) To freeze, the climate began to change dramatically. In Central Russia, "freezing rains" and hurricanes appeared, unprecedented forces. And the minke whales are pushing the connection of what is happening with politics.
  13. Cat Alexandrovich
    Cat Alexandrovich 14 December 2021 07: 19
    +3
    And what are these resolutions and other UN documents in general? Toilet papers!
    Just a very vivid example - there are all sorts of resolutions about Israel. Or the Minsk agreements ... Etc. etc.
    What then do I talk about?
  14. Skipper
    Skipper 14 December 2021 07: 46
    +1
    These western NATO jackals wanted without soap in .... in short, do not wash like this by skating by fraudulently blurring the truth, driving over the ears and hiding behind some kind of incomprehensible warming to officially impose on the world a serious document covering and giving these gopniks the right to attack any state, bursting with an ephemeral climate. For example, Greta speaks at the UN and points her finger at Venezuela that the country and the government do not comply with environmental standards and that's all ... NATO has the right to protect the climate on the planet by erasing the state. How convenient it is to rely on the cause for climate and ecology. Che that they are already violating their rights and building democracy is not happy .. probably people understood this slapstick and no one believes in these bogeymen ... now they have invented a new one - climate and ecology. How convenient, after all, in any country, there is always a violation of ecology and climate.
  15. 2112vda
    2112vda 14 December 2021 07: 50
    +3
    Well, finally, they stopped looking into the mouth of the naglo-Saxons. Anatoly Wasserman spoke in the Duma with a proposal to develop a law for the spread of all this "pseudo-green" dope. The process has started.
  16. sleeve
    sleeve 14 December 2021 09: 26
    0
    "Warming cause of conflicts"? Is this some kind of joke? They were the ones who wanted to improve the climate by bombing, if anything? And there are not NATO armed forces, but "climatologists"? Are they kidding or what?)
    1. Ura Karbovnichiy
      Ura Karbovnichiy 14 December 2021 10: 04
      +1
      They bombed Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yugoslavia ... ... to preserve the climate.
    2. 1Alexey
      1Alexey 14 December 2021 17: 37
      0
      Quote: sleeve
      "Warming cause of conflicts"? Is this some kind of joke? They were the ones who wanted to improve the climate by bombing, if anything? And there are not NATO armed forces, but "climatologists"? Are they kidding or what?)

      The main thing here is to correctly build the order of justification.

      Russia is to blame for the warming, because of the warming, the politics and military of the NATO countries overheated and began to bomb.

      In short, Russia is to blame for everything.
  17. Falcon iba
    Falcon iba 14 December 2021 09: 27
    +1
    US Permanent Representative to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield said that the Russian position "did not allow the main regulator in the world to solve the most important problem related to climate change issues."

    Normal resolutions on global problems must be previously agreed upon at least with the permanent members of the Security Council. Not like this: we have put together a project here, and you sign up without looking as a sign of global solidarity.
    Serious things are not done that way!
  18. usr01
    usr01 14 December 2021 09: 56
    0
    "There is an elderberry in the garden ... and in Kiev there is an uncle ..."
    So here.
  19. kriten
    kriten 14 December 2021 09: 56
    +1
    The litmus test of the correctness of Russia's actions is Britain's reaction; if it is against it, then the action is absolutely correct.
  20. Ura Karbovnichiy
    Ura Karbovnichiy 14 December 2021 10: 01
    +1
    Yes, so that America and England and goodness to the whole world !? Their whole mind is aimed at creating a new slavery, no matter through what.
  21. rennim166
    rennim166 14 December 2021 11: 10
    +1
    Something is not clear on the basis of what facts the UN Security Council comes to an opinion about the influence of the Climate on conflicts and the growth of the poor. If the world's oceans raise the level, then there is nothing at all and no one will stop migration. Rather, CAPITALISM is the main problem in the growth of poor and endless military conflicts.
    1. businessv
      businessv 14 December 2021 19: 22
      0
      Quote: rennim166
      Rather, CAPITALISM is the main problem in the growth of poor and endless military conflicts.
      Nebenzya said this when he vetoed this nonsense, but how can a capitalist prove that he is superfluous on this earth ?! wink
  22. Barge_watchman
    Barge_watchman 14 December 2021 17: 29
    -1
    The whole company is out of step ...
    I wonder what songs will sound when the permafrost begins to actively thaw?
  23. businessv
    businessv 14 December 2021 17: 34
    +1
    US Permanent Representative to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield said that the Russian position "did not allow the main regulator in the world to solve the most important problem related to climate change."
    This is because only Russia knows exactly what the "main regulatory body in the world" really is! wink Let the rest of the Naglo-Saxon grunts get lost!
  24. ck9999999
    ck9999999 14 December 2021 20: 02
    0
    When the US withdrew from the Paris Climate Treaty a couple of years ago, there was no such wave of sobbing and lamentations among "Yanko-addicts". Conclusion. The Russian Foreign Ministry put an end to mercantile and immoral speculations on the climate topic in time.
  25. Rinat Seidgazov
    Rinat Seidgazov 14 December 2021 21: 49
    0
    Someone's heads are overheated from global warming. They want to show that the naughty climate is to blame for the world's conflicts. In this case, there are no responsible, and there are only victims - both victims and overheated killers.
  26. 1536
    1536 15 December 2021 06: 50
    0
    The veto imposed by Russia on this "resolution" saves the "democratic" countries themselves, which were outraged by this veto, from their disappearance. At least, it slows down their erasure from the map, until humanity finally decided what it needs. Here it should be noted that these are precisely the countries where the climate is fertile or mild, where people live in comfort and bliss. So they live well because of the climate? Geographic factors of development have not yet been canceled. Consequently, all of them must "share" the climate with others, open the borders and enable all those who live in the subtropics, tropics, beyond the Arctic Circle, in areas of seismic danger, hurricanes and other natural disasters, to live where the climate is good. And the local population should make room and accept all those who are balancing somewhere in the desert or jungle on the brink of survival and help and appease them in every possible way. Or go to uninhabited areas, to places with a bad climate, ecology, in order to build oases, railways and mining and processing plants there. Here, as they say, you are welcome ... (Note: you cannot cut a forest - ecology, however).
    Somehow it reminded me of that distant statement of the Russian Soviet scientist I.V. Michurina: "We cannot wait for favors from nature; it is our task to take them from her." And there, you see, and apple trees will bloom on Mars.
  27. 75 Sergey
    75 Sergey 15 December 2021 08: 36
    0
    So India also put the bolt down.
    Why is it so modest about her?
  28. Basarev
    Basarev 15 December 2021 14: 56
    -1
    UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres announced that it is global warming that is behind the conflicts in the world, as well as behind the growing number of the poor.

    That is, incompetent politicians who cannot cope with their country are not at all to blame, is this all warming?
  29. Put__NIK
    Put__NIK 15 December 2021 16: 41
    0
    All projects accepted even by the Tumba-Yumba tribe are taken under the dictation of the United States and England, which means that these projects are behind a lot of money waiting to receive even more money.
    These projects are Russia's problems.
  30. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 18 December 2021 14: 06
    0
    It turns out that climate change has so influenced the mattresses that they are thrown at everyone who has at least something, but does not have nuclear weapons ... What, however, weather-dependent mattresses have gone ...