Is there ANYBODY in the world that still denies the severity of global warming?

[Zoid]

Originally posted by frostycreep
Has anyone got a link to the Kyoto agreement and what it consists of? Im just curious to know what it involves as its unfair of me to argue why everyone should sign it, if i dont know exactly what it involves.

Try http://unfccc.int/resource/convkp.html (the full horror )
http://cnie.org/NLE/CRSreports/Climate/clim-3.cfm (CRS report for US Congress)

http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/climat/kyoto.htm (EU Commission summary)

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Ming


And what about the "they would rather see the world perish part"...

Well, that´s implied...

[frostycreep]

cheers Kamrat, ill have a little browse!

[Ming]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
And to make it more disturbing, you side with mr Bush

Uhhhhh... what is more disturbing is your inability to comprehend what I have written. Please point out to all of us where I state that I side with Mr. Bush on this issue. While I do state that the agreement is flawed (which ALL the experts agree on), nowhere do I say that I side with Bush.

My POV on this subject is actually quite different.

The agreement is flawed. I wouldn't have signed it as currently written either. However, I would have stayed at the table to work out an agreement that wasn't flawed... and then, once a more realistic and non-flawed treaty was developed, I would cram it down the Senate's throat.

I don't think that this position is "siding with Mr. Bush"

[faded glory]

"What more proof do you need?"

Floods of similiar severity have hit Europe every 100-150 years.

Such floods happen in Asia alot.

I dont know abotu the drought. North America has had a drough for the last 4 years. Before that we were just fine.

I know if your an enviromentalist theres an urge to say "Global Warming did it" and look for scapegoats in the form of a certain nation that rejected the Kyoto Treaty. But look at the facts. Heavy rain did it. Not melting icecaps or franken-clouds that dried up lake chad and dropped it on the Elbe.


Droughts suck. Trust me I will be the first to admit that Im angry I cant go fishing this year. (there is no River). But im not going to jump to conclusions on what it could be. Your just connecting a few spread out dots and saying "Look its global warming". I could draw the same conclusion and say "Look this means the poles are shifting like they do every 13000 years!"

[Jon Miller]

I am reminded that the scare 20 years ago was a global winter started by pollution

so I naturally regard this with a little bit of sceptism

Jon Miller

[Gatekeeper]

Too bad the "brilliant" minds behind Kyoto didn't make the pact a global thing. As it is now, the polluting industries will more than likely simply relocate to parts of the globe not covered by Kyoto. China and India come to mind.

Gatekeeper

[faded glory]

JM, The same idiot scientists predicted in the late 60's that the world was coming to end cause of man-made pollution. The same people are predicting it today. These people who enrich themselves on tax money on the so-called "Science" of global warming are as bad if not WORSE than the doomsday preachers downtown. The more they warn of impending doom the more money comes there way. Its a sad fact these people over-exaggeriate these things to get funding and a new story on there house.

[Jon Miller]

I am proscience so I don't care how they get money

but I am suggesting that a little sceptism is needed in this matter (and a lot of scientists that speak out on this matter don't have the knowledge to do so)

Jon Miller

[Verto]

Is this another thread trying to take my SUV away?

Oh, BTW, I especially liked the part where you blamed our troops in Afghanistan for that cloud.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Ming


Uhhhhh... what is more disturbing is your inability to comprehend what I have written. Please point out to all of us where I state that I side with Mr. Bush on this issue. While I do state that the agreement is flawed (which ALL the experts agree on), nowhere do I say that I side with Bush.

My POV on this subject is actually quite different.

The agreement is flawed. I wouldn't have signed it as currently written either. However, I would have stayed at the table to work out an agreement that wasn't flawed... and then, once a more realistic and non-flawed treaty was developed, I would cram it down the Senate's throat.

I don't think that this position is "siding with Mr. Bush"

Ok that was wrongly written
not neccessarily you, or any of the preople responding - do side with Bush(oh what an insult ), but basically even though he admitted recently that global warming is scientifically plausible, he is not ready to do anything about it really. Anyway such response from a person in his position (and the administration he represents) it is concerning, and as well from a civil person who seems to think it is the right (in)action. (or ignorance)

As per above post of mine, it seems obvious to me that we might have ignored this one a bit too long (which is normal looking at our human nature ) but still I think there are good reasons that some incentive should be taken regarding this potentially huge future problem, that we will not be able to control once if fully develops.

[faded glory]

"Too bad the "brilliant" minds behind Kyoto didn't make the pact a global thing. As it is now, the polluting industries will more than likely simply relocate to parts of the globe not covered by Kyoto. China and India come to mind. "


This has already happened. Corporations and industries have left W.Europe and N. America to go to Asia. Tho Pollution is one reason some left. Most of it was greed and the promise of cheaper labor costs and higher profit margins.

Sad isnt it?


Also Kyoto was terribly flawed. Anybody who wants to ratify it is wasting there time. Look at the Smog cloud in Asia. Thats never happened here. Not on that big of a scale. I saw those kind of things in Mexico City but still, not 2 miles into the sky. Kyoto needs to be foreverone. or else its a waste of time

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Perhaps it was a beginning, however it needs to be better, I guess everyone would agree to that.

[Capt Dizle]

The reason that many Americans won't concede that there might be a real global warming issue is that we are hearing it from the liberal left and we simply don't trust them.

The liberal left in America opperates by finding issues with victims and promoting themselves as the champions of the little guys against the big bad fat cat Republicans.

Women, the disabled, minorities, gays are among the groups that have been label victims and the left has forced legislation to grant them special rights above and beyond other citizens. Many Americans believe that the liberals are not so interested in helping these groups as sustaining their status of victims so that it will contribute to their power base. Votes.

Partisan politics.....bickering has jaded America. We don't believe anything the left says and the environment has always been a leftist agenda item.

It works both ways of course, the left is peddling the notion that Bush is going to Iraq for votes. So if you label one side as cynical, bring two labels.

The country is split about 50% left -50%right, insofar as voters go but most of us don't vote anymore.

Since we see scientific studies as they are, partisan, mostly leftist from universities and paid right wing studies, we aren't going to give any of those any credence.

You would have to come up with a source that most of the American people will believe in and I don't think one exists.

As far as I am concerned global warming is just another made up political issue.

[Vanguard]

Who cares if someone can prove that global warming is occuring or not? Global Warming is potentially so dangerous that it is worth doing something about regardless of whether we positively know it is going on.

Global warming poses the real possibility of wiping out all life on Earth and turning the planet into an uninhabitable wasteland. On the whole, this would seem to be A Bad Thing. I admit that, yes, there might be some attendant benefits to the extermination of all life on Earth. But overall it seems to me that the economic and social effects would be largely negative. It would, for instance, reduce global GDP by about 40 trillion dollars a year. Real estate and stock values would also be affected.

So, even if the chance that global warming is occuring is only 1 in 20, it is still worth spending, basically, whatever it takes to signifigantly reduce that chance. Sign the damn Kyoto agreement already. Stop wasting my money.