Climate change/global warmers believers are swearing oaths and taking pledges to show fidelity to the UN IPCC and Paris accord. The ceremony goes by the name We Are Still In. Adherents sign this document:
Open letter to the international community and parties to the Paris Agreement from U.S. state, local, and business leaders (Full text here)
The creed asserts the following:
Fighting climate change brings significant economic and public health benefits, but
No mention of trillions of someone’s dollars to be spent
Ignores research showing warming saves lives.
Paris accord will avoid the most dangerous and costly effects of climate change, but
If all nations comply, it could mean only 0.2C less warming by 2100.
The U.S. will remain a global leader in reducing emissions, but
Presumes killing the economy as in last recession
Fails to credit fracking revolution
Exported energy emissions are charged to others.
The global effort will hold warming to well below 2℃, but
Up to 2℃ is net beneficial
Achieving NDCs, especially China’s and India’s won’t bend the curve.
The transition to a clean energy economy will accelerate, but
Renewables are not low-carbon, are costly and unreliable.
The following statement was released today by the presidents of 12 major U.S. research universities, commonly referred to as the “Ivy-Plus” group. (Full text here)
Affirmation of leading research universities’ commitment to progress on climate change
The climate is changing largely due to human activity, but
No one has yet proven how much warming humans cause.
The imperative of a low carbon future is increasingly urgent, but
All metrics show climate variations are within normal ranges.
The consequences of climate change are accelerating, but
Statistical measures of changes to natural conditions are not accelerating.
Research will advance evidence-based understanding of the causes and effects of climate change on the environment, the economy and public health, and develop solutions, but
Presently our knowledge of the climate system does not allow us to predict its behavior.
Summary
The last point is the only difference between the “Wearestillin” crowd and the “Ivy-Plus”. The latter leaves the door open to actually study how the climate changes naturally, that is, to gain knowledge how internal natural processes cause multi-decadal effects upon temperature and precipitation. So far the IPCC has willfully stayed ignorant of that need to know.
Science Matters 
Thanks for the post.
We know that since 1750 the only driver in climate change is anthropogenic. How do we know that? That renowned scientist, Mr. Bill Nye, said that if it weren’t for humans we’d have the same climate as 1750. Obviously the climate stopped changing naturally 267 years ago and the science is settled.
Fidelity is faithfulness to a person, cause or belief. So, does climate fidelity mean faithfulness to weather conditions prevailing in an area over a long period? When you look at the definition of words these political catechisms seem even more ludicrous.
LikeLike
What else could “fighting climate change” mean except to stop it. The two suppositions are:
Climate does not change by itself, only from human activity; and,
It can only get warmer as CO2 rises.
Looks like they are calling for a Cold War.
LikeLike
That’s almost verbatim the kind of Barbarians At The Gates cries the Republican and Prohibition parties were spouting after the Liberal Party donated its 1931 wet plank to the Democrats in 1932. FDR and Truman went on to win the next 5 elections despite the prayers of the pseudoscientists and pseudoeconomists. Their consensus claimed prohibition enforcement using tax laws was the source of American prosperity, and they had the models to prove it! Maybe next election the DemoGreenzis can promise to ban electricity and still win…
LikeLike