Tip - If you are using a phone, set the "Desktop Site" option in your browser   


Another riotously successful climate conference concluded, with much material for awaiting journalists to report to their eager readerships.

Not to be outdone, NetZero Watch add in their two-pen'orth for good measure - and some might say bring some much-needed realism and humour (not specifically in that order) to the topic.

The dreadful truth of course is that the War on Climate was the front-runner for the War on Terror, and lately the War on Pandemics - none of which can ever be determined to be won, since how would you define "winning"?

To measure the changing climate with any accuracy is a fools errand, given the chaotic nature of the contributing weather patterns; we might need accurate statistics spanning a century before a real trend could be determined and even that might not be enough.

And how to announce the end of the War on Terror when terrorists simply melt away and regroup somewhere else?

As for pandemics, the WHO has made it clear that in their omniscient view, there will always be another lurking just around the corner ...

So what purpose could these wars really serve?

(Answers on a postcard please to the usual address)