Copenhagen Climate Change Summit

Battle Of Copenhagen 1801The Copenhagen Climate Change Summit is underway in Denmark with world leaders and delegates debating the future of the worlds climate. The topic of Climate Change is on everyone’s lips at the moment and Denmark hasn’t had this much attention since Lord Nelson’s terror bombardment of the Danes in The Battle Of Copenhagen 1801.

Climate Change Summit- Or Climate Retention Summit?

Maybe it should be called a Climate Retention Summit as surely we want the climate to stay the same – not change! Wallace Wattles would be turning in his grave! He said “Whatever you focus on, you end up with”. So basically, focus on the outcome and that is what you will get. These guys are focusing on and discussing Climate Change… Let’s hope these bureaucrats are not very good at what they do, because none of us want Climate Change! We want the weather to stay exactly the same way, thank you very much!

For those of you that subscribe to positive thinking, you’ll understand exactly where I am coming from.

Wonderful, Wonderful Copenhagen!

Little Mermaid in CopenhagenBefore I venture off into Climate Change Controversy, I’ll share some gossip on good old Copenhagen. I spent quite some time in Denmark and Sweden as a child and teenager. I actually got married in Copenhagen in 1993. It is a great place and a destination everyone should travel to at least once in their life. The bureaucrats could have chosen a better time of year though. They won’t notice much Global Warming in Denmark this time of year, unless of course they take up the offer by the Danish Prostitution Union to give free sex to anyone with a Climate Conference Delegate’s Pass!

The Rasmussen Dynasty Of Denmark

Anders Fogh RasmussenCopenhagen is the home of many famous people in history. One of the most famous is Hans Christian Andersen who penned countless children’s stories such as The Little Mermaid and The Ugly Duckling. Someone that is rapidly rising in fame, is the former Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who is now the Secretary General of NATO. Replacing the Danish Prime Minister was easy enough as the next one was a Rasmussen as well. As a matter of fact, the last 3 have been Rasmussen’s! What is going on? Is this the start of a new Rasmussen Dynasty?

Climate Change Controversy – Lord Monckton

Not everyone buys into the Copenhagen Summit. The Australian opposition leader, Tony Abbot compared it to the Munich Agreement… Yes, a classy comparison indeed! That was when Britain, France and Italy signed an agreement to allow Germany taking parts of Czechoslovakia in 1938. Lord Monckton, former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, said this in a speech recently in the USA:

Lord MoncktonLord Monckton: “At Copenhagen, this December, a treaty will be signed. Your President [Obama] will sign it. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The “word government” actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to Third World countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, Climate Debt — because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t, and we’ve been screwing up the climate. We haven’t been screwing up the climate but that’s the line. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement…”

What Lord Monckton is saying is that the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit is nothing else but an excuse to implement the next stage of a world government: A New World Order.

(These are the views and opinions of Lord Monckton; not the blog author)

Lord Monckton – Why Global Warming Is Not Man Made

Lord Monckton speaks up in this interview on why global warming is NOT man made; how it is one of the biggest scientific scams ever and why Russia is more of a Democracy than Britain. Take 11 minutes to listen to Lord Monckton and tell me in the comments what you think. It will be 11 minutes well spent!

YouTube Preview Image

Personally, I think there will be enough hot air coming out of the mouths of the 15,000 delegates in the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit over the next 2 weeks to raise global temperatures by 2 degrees and melt polarcaps across the globe! There are now 1,200 limousines driving these suits around Copenhagen and I’m sure they are not hybrid cars.

The Copenhagen Climate Change Challenge

In 1997, George Bush (USA) and John Howard (AUS)  refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol. Australia even announced that they wanted to increase their carbon emmissions… maybe Kyoto was not the right forum to break that news! This time around it seems Barack Obama (USA) and Kevin Rudd (AUS) are far more likely to sign the dotted line than their predecessors. Let’s hope Lord Monckton is right (for our climate’s sake) and that the politicians are just wasting a few more currencies. I think the poor countries have got a bad enough deal as it is. Hopefully the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit doesn’t result in some “International Treaty” that overrides individual countries right to make their own rules and laws.

And let’s hope for some better weather… 😉

Sean Rasmussen
Success Communicator
Aussie Internet Marketer © 2004 – 2009

About Sean Rasmussen

Sean Rasmussen is a passionate blogger and has been a full time internet marketer since 2005. When he's not with his family, or dog Buddy, Sean is usually blogging or doing something related to the internet.


  1. i absolutly…dont agree with u.
    climate has to change for good, i dont believe on keeping it the way it is cuz is hurting millions of people and if it keeps going this way, well it’ll hurt us even more, and believe me, maybe in the place u live you dont feel it or experience it yet, you soon will, or maybe your grandsons or their grandsons.
    and yes global warming is man made! definitly…this point i wont even argue… just watch the news…or come to ECuador for a change!

    • Hi Adriana
      By the “climate staying the same”, I mean that it “doesn’t change”. The climate change debate is about the climate getting worse (warming up). I’m quite happy for the weather to stay the way it is and not get warmer across the globe. 🙂

      • Climate change is a natural occurence isn’t it? If something doesn’t change then surely it is dead. It comes as no surprise to me that Henny Penny has noticed that the climate is trending warmer. We all know about the ice age don’t we? I’m pretty sure I would not have wanted to be around when the world was basically an ice block.

        Sure we are concerned that the climate is getting hotter but that doesn’t mean that we can do a whole lot about it. Don’t get me wrong though; I beleve we should be reducing our carbon footprint and reducing pollution. But even if humans did not exist on earth I reckon the climate would have continued to warm up. The question that no-one agrees on is have we humans accellerated the rate of global warming?

        Interesting that everyone agrees that change is good except for when it comes to the weather.

  2. Great post Sean,

    It is amazing to see how people always attempt to polarise the community: “If you’re not with us, you’re against us”. I have noticed this a lot as a young scientist working in the field of agriculture, ie. the genetic modification, or organic produce debates. Financial interests always give rise to this polarisation, in an attempt to demonise the competition.

    With the so-called climate change debate, the pro-climate change crowd have tried to imply that their policy of selling out oursovereign rights to the money powers of the world is the only way to solve it [climate change], and that anybody who dares to suggest otherwise is an outright climate change denier, stuck in olden times!

    I’m pleased to see you post something of great importance, without bias, but which greatly adds to the debate that we must have.

    • Hi James
      I don’t agree or disagree with Lord Monckton, but what he says has as much credibility (possibly more) from a scientific standpoint than the other side of the equation (about global warming being man made).
      People are very fast to believe everything and anything they hear on the news as long as it is fed to them over a sustainable period of time. Most write opinions like this off without even listening to it. All it takes is an open mind.

      • You’ve mentioned a very significant issue there Sean. People do in the main beleive what they hear on the news. The really sad part of that is that people increasingly rely on those TV 30 second snippets on which they base their opinions on what is after all a very complex issue. This goes way beyond the climate debate. I can remember when investigative reports on a wide variety of current affairs was the norm. These days the news media go for drama and lots of little bits of news rather than getting to the guts of the issue.
        At least the internet allows those interested to do their own research but sometimes forget the questionable sources of some reports. At least they can access information from many different sources and come up with their own assessment of the real truth.

  3. graham bishop says:

    Hi sean,

    this guy is right on the mark! I am guessing you’ve seen videos like “the great global warming swindle”. i find it interesting how they suddenly changed their ‘speak’ in the media from ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’ and without any explanation.
    apparently also national geographic back in the late nineties showed a graph of world temperatures from about AD 1 to now which included a temperature spike around ( if i can remember) the 12th and 13th centuries then the mini ice-age around the 17th century – but their later publication circa 2005 / 2006 just left out that spike as they put forward their discussion on global warming.

    • It’s all in the eye of the beholder. Any topic can be made to suit the person leading the discussion. Stats are there for manipulating.

      • Statistically a person with their feet in the fire and their head in the freezer is quite comfortable.

        And when you say “..Any topic can be made to suit the person leading the discussion” I assume you mean when that person is a politican for they are masters of obfuscation; not answering the question, and filling any silence with their own agenda regardless of wheather it relates to the question posed or not.

      • Well Sean… you are very wise. Topics are a matter of interpretation and therefore subjective based on how the person ‘sees’ the discussion. You can take any topic and completely turn it around on it’s head to make it about something else completely different. Politicians call it spin doctoring…. Witty Sam calls it a natural phenomenon of her crazy imagination.

        You either get mad or change the way you think about the topic – especially global warming, as it seems to be such a ‘hot bed’ (I crack me up). It’s impossible-ness to change everyone’s mind or make people be more responsible-ness when it comes to how they can take their part in looking after our poor old defenseless planet.
        .-= Samantha Banfield´s last blog ..Sean Rasmussen and his crazy talk! =-.

  4. Do you think the experts will listen to Lord Monkton – he is not saying the things they want to hear. We are so lucky to have so many political bright sparks to take care our mere motal needs. If all the money that is wasted on political debates was channelled into providing machinery and expertise to poor countries so that they could improve their systems of agriculture and feed their people, maybe the world would be a happier place for those who don’ get enough to eat every day, especially those kids that will die of starvation before they are able to make a difference.

    • (small voice) Or maybe Obama could spend money on his homesoil people rather than sending another 30,000 troops to the United States of Afghanistan – Shish! I hope no one reads that!

      • Althought I totally agree with you on that one I think that you should take some time out to watch ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ – after all, Bush wouldn’t have been in power and wouldn’t have had opportunity to mess with all the troops if Al Gore had been granted what he deserved…
        .-= Lisa´s last blog ..Sign Language for Babies =-.

        • Bush should not have ever got into power. The Florida fraud was a disgrace and I still am gobsmacked that the US Federal Court upheld the election of Bush. I can still remeber the look of astonishement on GW’s face when he realised he had won – he couldn’t beleive it either.

        • Lisa, I forgot about that doco. I really enjoyed watching that – if ‘enjoyed’ is a good word. I felt enlightened and yet sad at the same time. Gore I believe showed it (for the dummies) in black & white – images, stats etc.

          I think it’s the best environmental doco made in a very long time. I guess when it’s your passion, you put your heart & soul into & make something awesome!
          .-= Samantha Banfield´s last blog ..Sean Rasmussen and his crazy talk! =-.

  5. There is one humungous carbon footprint being made in Copenhagen by all that is going on there and just how much of it is just HOT AIR? The powers that be would like to be much richer by taxing the air that we breathe all under the umbrella of climate change. Can someone tell me when we have not had climate change? Who killed the dinosaurs? I don’t recall history blaiming neandathal man for their demise, but history does refer to climate change as being a factor. Australia would now have a majority of hybrid vehicles if the big oil companies had not literally squashed the first fleet and all in the name of greed. I second James comment “If you’re not with us, you’re against us”.
    .-= Isa´s last blog ..Reclaim Dollars From Your Bank =-.

    • Hi Isa
      My late father had this discussion with me in 1998. He literally said what Lord Monckton said and that was 11 years ago. QUOTE: “The human impact on the worlds climate is less than 1 degree. The rest is a cycle that has been happening for Millions of years”.
      That is a point that has to seriously considered. The climate change topic takes away from the real issues like messing around in the Middle East and war mongering by “peaceful” nations for profit.

  6. Of course climate change exists. The climate has been changing since year dot and will continue to with or without human interaction. Change is the only constant thing that exists in life.

    Just another example of problem – reaction – solution and a further push towards the New World Order. Just add it to the likes of the United Nations and The World Health Organisation and it is just a big a crock as those.
    .-= Clint Maher´s last blog ..Perth Web Design And Website Layout =-.

  7. Thank you sean, for this presentation, very informative. i particularly enjoyed the video, voices that offer considered, thoughtful opinions certainly need to be heard at this time, and heard by as many who will listen. The New World Order concept has been around for a while now, and seems to only have lasted so long because we only now have the tools to raise our voices and be heard.

    • Hi Jo
      I think it’s important for all views to be heard. Far too often, educated views are squashed and only people like Lord Monckton, who can finance himself, can afford to push their views to the public. In the end, he will be forgotten and the Obama’s, Bush’s & Blair’s will get their way for whoever sponsors them. History has proven that time and again. So I like to show both sides of the story, just to put a Cat amongst the Pigeons 😉

  8. Interesting post and video Sean, however I think Monckton is missing the point.

    I think most people agree the climate is changing. What is not agreed upon is the cause of that change.

    The real issue is not whether the climate is changing because of us or not, it’s how it is changing and how it will impact us. And therefore, what can we do to protect our way of life?

    The fact that it has been changing over tens of thousands of years is irrelevant – we weren’t around then but we are now, so the changes impact us now. For example, see (this is fact, it’s getting hotter here).

    I’m not saying I agree with the call to drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions and so on, but we do need to look at the impact of climate change and decide how best to deal with it.

    Saying it isn’t a problem at all and doing nothing reminds me of ostriches…

    • Hi Dinus, I’m not so sure that we can just ignore the question – is the climate changing because of us. I think that we need to determine just how much we are affecting the speed of change and if it is found that we are in fact a contributiong factor to resolve how to address that question. I have no doubt that climate change would have happened with or without us but surely we should have a better understanding of our contribution.

      And yes I agree that we need to decide how to deal with the impact of the change. But surely we can’t effectively do that properly if we ignore the question of how we may or may not have contributed. For example, are greenhouse gasses the real cause or is it the butterfly effect? If the former then reduce the gasses, if the latter then reduce movement. Well that’s an over-simplified example but I hope you get my meaning. Certainly the real answer is so complex that maybe the answer is 42 (as in the meaning of life! LOL)

  9. Brian potts says:

    Read this Article.
    Also go here & watch all 8 segments
    A 1 word government is Bad News — Over population is far worse.
    Look at history, dinosaurs & vegetation, ice-age, massive windstorms that moved mountains of dirt. That vegetation is now dug in the form of coal.
    Energy is neither created, nor destroyed, but is transferred.
    Magnetic fields keep the planets in orbit. You can’t surely believe that earth travels the identical path & distance around the sun on the 10th of Dec of every year?

    • Hi Brian
      I am aware of the Multi Billion Dollar fee Australia will pay a world authority annually and the power they will have over Australia. I didn’t want to write about it as people just will refuse to believe it. It’s almost a futile effort to bring it up. But thanks for raising it.

  10. Hi ….
    A man who declare that Russia is a democracy in compare to Europe is a wery dangerous man – even he is a Lord. A man who traing to convince me that he is right and everyone else is wrong, I say he is a wery dangerous man. If we can do anything to prevent human suffering and global catastrophe I say – lets have a try.
    The man Jörgen

  11. Ruth Rojas says:

    I believe in stead of worshipping creation, we need to worship the Creator!

  12. @Sean re: The Little Mermaid Statue

    Under the category of “lifes little disappointments” was when I visited Copenhagen and visited the Little Mermaid Statue. I was shocked. All the pictures I saw of it led me to think that it was a grand work of art and befiting the notoriety of Hans Christian Andersen. The relatively small size of the statue typically surprised me. The Little Mermaid statue is only 1.25 metres high and weighs around 175 kg. At least it was close to the shoreline and was easy to see.

    Another thing that surprised me and not very far from the statue involved a gypsy doing the pea under the shell. Totally confident that my eye was faster than his hand I left with my wallet a little lighter and remembered why I normally don’t gamble.

  13. And yet the moon gets no admiration what-so-ever!! Everyone seems to be worshipping the sun even thought the sun gives skin, skin-cancer. The moon does so much and yet is so unappreciated!! In fact, the phrase “once in a blue moon” upsets the moon because we use it in such a negative way. The moon created the blue moon just for us & didn’t want it to happen everyday – nobody appreciates that, the moon thought. So it comes around once in a blue moon.

    And don’t get the moon started on the tides…
    .-= Samantha Banfield´s last blog ..Sean Rasmussen and his crazy talk! =-.

  14. Whatever your views on what causes the change in our climate, surely we can agree that we can do a lot more to have a cleaner environment. That we have a responsibility to ensure that our children and their children and their descendants can enjoy our beautiful planet. If we can do more to recycle, use less energy, minimise pollution – in effective ways – then surely that’s a good thing.
    .-= Lina Nguyen´s last blog ..How to make comments online and build your online persona =-.

    • I think even if we are not sure that we cause problems (which I am sure we do) we should use our creativity to lessen that burden – for our own sake. Not only would it most likely be great for the environment to use less oil, it would help our hip pockets long term as well as oil is a finite resource – nobody is debating that. So why not look for alternatives while we still can???
      .-= Renee´s last blog ..Motivational Music =-.

      • Jazz Salinger says:

        Hi Renee.

        I agree with you that we all need to look for alternatives to lessen the effects of climate change (no matter what the cause).

        I think green technology is a good place to start.

  15. Collectively there is alot we can do as a global nation.

    And the positive thing is that government leadership has changed with new thinking – Obama has the foresight & intelligence to understand that there is a real threat to our future if we don’t make steps but all I ever hear is that the underlying issue is big business and their money!!

    Shifting thinking towards green technology means jobs & a future for us all.
    .-= Samantha Banfield´s last blog ..Sean Rasmussen and his crazy talk! =-.

  16. Jazz Salinger says:

    Hi Sean,

    I find Lord Monckton’s views really interesting. He seems to have a lot of facts that we can independently check for ourselves. I really like the way he presents his information and I find him to be very persuasive.

    I’ve never actually bothered to check the facts on climate change for myself. I assumed that the politicians and the media would tell me the truth. I don’t know what I was thinking. Lord Monckton is certainly a lot more believable.

    Thank-you for such a great post.

  17. Jazz

    Politicians tell us the truth? That’s stretching it.

    I am in the camp of how do people think we had ice ages and then it melted. The climate would of been shifting all over the place since adam was a boy. Measuring temperatures for 50 years is going to tell us what has been happening for millions? Really!

    No matter what you believe what are they going to do? Nought as usual. It’s up to each one of us to do our bit. Recycle, fuel efficient vehicles or dare I say it walk or ride a bike!

    And lastly I don’t pay the surcharge for supposed green energy. Whats that all about? To make us think we are doing something maybe
    .-= Gee´s last blog ..Search Engine Optimization Tips For Baby Boomers =-.

  18. Why on earth are people talking about ‘truth’? I ask you all – what in the hell is ‘truth’? It’s just a concept of utopian society…

    It’s also used against people – in a blame game – and when we ‘blame’ people we are essentially not taking responsibilities ourselves….

    Soap-box moment over…
    .-= Samantha Banfield´s last blog ..Sean Rasmussen and his crazy talk! =-.

  19. Hello Sean,

    Totally agree with Lord Monckton on his views about Global Change. I hope that the meeting with all the politicans was to their benefit because it will not be a benefit to the changes of the World……I am a big beliver in what you think happens, but also what goes around, comes around. So the leaders get togther, they waste more money on driving gorgeous cars (with their own driver) but they get to speak with each other and that would be a punishment in itself…….a room full of boring people. I suppose they get yummy drinks and food.

    Great video, I love the remark about the swine flu. There is no way that I will ever have the swine flu needle. You have a chance of dieing from the needle, higher than the swine flu.

    Lord Monckton is one smart man. He has brought up some good points about how we never knew what happened before, so how do we know its any different? he is a brave man with finishing the speech “No I will not bother talking to the British…..” Bet that went down well 🙂
    .-= Lisa Wood´s last blog ..Searching For Gratitude Rocks =-.

  20. Hi Sean,
    I see the climate change debate as a catch 22 situation and one that lets the scientists off the hook, “completely” and they have been playing with the weather for years. The “scientists playing with the weather” has been a concern since, at least the 60’s that I know about. Many older concerned citizen’s were making it known to the younger generation with a warning that, “It will effect you in your day” and well, if no truth is in it, then how do we explain “Chem Trails?”

    Also, In the 60’s we were profound recyclers and threw nothing away, until around the time we adopted, “The Lima Agreement” Around this same time also we also became “the-throw-away society” Why?! We know why. Who’s influence caused this? We know who’s. I think the answer is fairly obvious.

    We are such trusting soles. We trust that our pollies are looking after our interests. Our trusting nature is to our demise, unfortunately!


  21. G’day Sean,
    This is a most complex argument to say the least. Monckton seems to have heaps of evidence against the mainstream and is an excellent speaker. I heard an audio of an interview done with Allan Jones of 2UE and it sounded very convincing. Against that I have a mate who claims Monckton is a ” lacky of the coal industry ” and is all hot air. Must agree with you about the greenhouse gases from the 1200 limousines.

    On the subject of Rasmussens, did you hear about a Rasmussen family from Bendigo or Ballarat who adopted 3 children from Haiti and went back after the earthquake to assist in a serious way ? It was on 60 Minutes 2-3 weeks ago. Any relation ?

    .-= Harry Lynn´s last blog ..How Proud Can One Be ? =-.

  22. Hi Sean

    Good on Lord Monkton. I agree with him . Like your father said Sean “the rest is a cycle that has been happening for Millions of years”.

    An article was written last year by an Australian scientist totally rebuking global warming. She believed we are going through a natural cycle.

    We think we are so amazing that we can change the climate yet we are parasites on the land stripping it of all it’s resources!

Speak Your Mind