Canadian parliament backs Kyoto ratification plan

[gsmoove23]

Cool, you know I just made the connection. For the longest time I was trying to figure out who your avatar was, I recognized him but I couldn't quite remember. You ARE Fez! Damn I'm stupid.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ozz


Buzz... wrong again,

Nope you are wrong again, and made a fool of yourself this time in the process.

They are already accepted, and industries that don't
comply will eithier bring themselves up to standard or
become extinct. Any industry not complying will have
it's market limited to the non Kyoto world by trade
barriers.

Kyoto sucks. I mean what will it do? It will even kill newer industries. It is so retroactive it is pathetic. It will even allow developing countries to pollute more. PATHETIC! Now I would be quiet if I were you. Your ideals have been completely rejected.

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Ned


"Better environment" - but for whom?

"Universal benefits" - really? How does Canada benefit?

The environmental downsides the Canadians will be protecting against are located elsewhere, outside Canada. From my understanding, Canada will receive tremendous benefits from a warmer climate.

The above is the practical view. The strict view, which I personally find extremist, is that any change is "bad" even if is "good."

Wow, that's a tremendously narrow-minded view. Having a warmer climate may mean better crop growing conditions and a longer summer tourist season, but there are enormous downsides too. First off, a warmer climate doesn't meant that the temperature will simply go up a couple of degrees uniformly across the land. You should expect some areas to become more prone to massive storms and drought. Second, even a more agreeable temperature in currently non-arable areas does little to make them more productive if good soils don't exist. Third, the possible impact on flora and fauna may be far from beneficial, as the changes may be more rapid than can be naturally adapted to.

Having said this, I'm far from some tree-hugging environmentalist that thinks we need immediate and massive changes or we're all going to die. I just think your statement is very ill thought out.

[Ozz]

Originally posted by Fez
I call for extremely large subsidies for new technology ventures.

Wrong again, This is exactly what will raise taxes, kill
new "clean" industry and lower produtivity in tech
development.

Your just a closet pinko Socialist with your state funded
commie ideals.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ozz


Wrong again, This is exactly what will raise taxes, kill
new "clean" industry and lower produtivity in tech
development.

Your just a closet pinko Socialist with your state funded
commie ideals.

You are extremely foolish. The private sector needs funds to do its research. And your marxist beliefs will only shoot down the economy.

Do yourself a favor, Mr Double Login, and leave this thread.

[Japher]

Kyoto is a good idea that will never work. It is a kissing the baby technique.

When was the last time any political action did anything to help both the economy and the environment?

This plan is dumb. Something does need to be done, but not this.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Fez is in the IB? I would never have known. So am I. ALL IB exams are taken in May, not Nov/ Dec.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
Fez is in the IB? I would never have known. So am I. ALL IB exams are taken in May, not Nov/ Dec.

These were mocks, num nuts.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

We take the mocks in Jan/ Feb. Just out of curiosity, whats your grade in TOK?

[Giancarlo]

I have an B+ in TOK... but what about TOK? So what? I don't like that class anyways... I would of preferred to take higher level history but with the mess my schedule was in, I couldn't.

Edit: Wait a minute... how do you know I take TOK? Have I mentioned it here before?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

B+, I'm surprised, seeing how you dismiss everyone else's arguments without any thought. I'm taking HL History, HL Econ, and HL French.

[Giancarlo]

Give me a break for a change... I hate the class... but I do my work and I have discussions.

I had AP econ last year.

I really wanted IB Post-WWII History (Cold War) but my schedule was a mess.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kontiki



Wow, that's a tremendously narrow-minded view. Having a warmer climate may mean better crop growing conditions and a longer summer tourist season, but there are enormous downsides too. First off, a warmer climate doesn't meant that the temperature will simply go up a couple of degrees uniformly across the land. You should expect some areas to become more prone to massive storms and drought. Second, even a more agreeable temperature in currently non-arable areas does little to make them more productive if good soils don't exist. Third, the possible impact on flora and fauna may be far from beneficial, as the changes may be more rapid than can be naturally adapted to.

Having said this, I'm far from some tree-hugging environmentalist that thinks we need immediate and massive changes or we're all going to die. I just think your statement is very ill thought out.

I stated the argument concisely as I could. There are professors who make the same argument with a lot of citation to authority. The argument is primarily based on the actual prediction of the environmental models.

I agree, of course, that radical and change can devastate because flora and fauna cannot adapt fast enough. But we are actually finding that the climate change is happening with glacial slowness, if at all. (No pun intended.)

Regardless, there has to be more debate on the fundamentals of what will happen before we decide that that warmer future is something that we do not want and must sacrifice to avoid. For example, we might find an ideal climate for Earth might be 5 degrees C warmer than now. In fact, I believe we did have that “ideal” climate 8000 years ago. The question would then become how we could get to 5 degrees warmer, and stop, with minimal environmental damage.