Today 56 newspapers in 45 countries take the unprecedented step of speaking with one voice through a common editorial. We do so because humanity faces a profound emergency.
Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet, and with it our prosperity and security. The dangers have been becoming apparent for a generation.
I love it:
Social justice demands that the industrialised world digs deep into its pockets and pledges cash to help poorer countries adapt to climate change, and clean technologies to enable them to grow economically without growing their emissions.
The transformation will be costly, but many times less than the bill for bailing out global finance — and far less costly than the consequences of doing nothing.
Note the comments. Any comment condemning the editorial is deleted. You have to be lockstep or you are out.
#18, either you missed my sophisticated reference to a world-wide social initiative, or I missed whatever sophisticated reference you were making – ?
whats funny about all this is that Greenland was named for how it looked. Yet, it then got covered in Ice.
Corporations pollute the air, sea and land. We dig up oil to burn, and then say “Its not our fault”. Only because to take responsibility would mean they were at fault. So, they get a bunch of other corporations together to blame the populace, drugging them with idiotic TV and dumbing down the school curriculum, and then hold the blame on their heads by raising taxes to pay for the folly of the corporate giants.
And then make it so people start arguing about who and what is at fault, rather than actually spending the time to clean it up so everyone can benefit.
Reading these posts for the last few days, and it just shows that you cannot change peoples minds, because for a person to have an opinion they have to know the whole facts behind what they are discussing. In these days of hiding and cloak/dagger melodrama, people are more concerned with whats on the TV than whats growing in their yards.
The ‘global warming’ argument has been around as long as I can remember, and back in the 70′s…in the days of the ‘oil crisis’ where people waited in lines to get that precious fuel at ‘exorbitant prices’ (.90 a GAL!! Outrageous), all the while not realizing that all of the pollutants being spewed HAD to go somewhere.
The current generation has been left with the cleanup of a decades long party, and the people responsible don’t want to have to pay for the disposal and effective use of NEW ideas and solutions, simply because it would mean money leaving their pockets. And thats unfair to the capitalists isn’t it?
Mr. Dvorak… I hope you don’t have any beachfront property. Well, if you don’t, you very well may have some soon!
But seriously…. I look at global warming in a similar light to heart disease. Sure, due to genetics some folks are subject to heart disease. So, it is in our best interest to avoid those activities that lead towards heart disease such as a fatty diet, lack of exercise, etc.
The earth’s has warmed up and cooled down many times before man had a chance to make any significant impact on the planet’s temperature. However, mankind now can have that significant impact, and when that is coupled with the earth’s fluctuations we could be quickening that warming trend. So, it is to our own advantage to try to avoid or decrease those activities that speed up global warming, such as carbon emissions.
Think about it – the acidity of rain has fluctuated throughout the earth’s existence, too. We’ve also found that man can and does significantly affect the acidity of rain. So, did we shrug it off and declare it a natural phenomenon, or did we take steps to limit those emissions that adversely affected the rain? For those who don’t bother reading history – We took the necessary steps.
Laugh all you want, just as bozos laughed at the idea of the world being round, or burned those who dared to claim the earth was NOT the center of the universe. But we do affect the planet’s temperature, and we should do what we can to limit those adverse effects.
(BTW – this is not a socialist/one-world-order/whatever call for industrialized nations to abandon our standard of living and give all our worldly goods to developing nations… this is simply a note stating the path we are on is not working, so we need to find another path. We should be able to do that in a perfectly fine capitalistic manner… at least I hope we can.)
THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!!
Remember you herd it here first!
This says it all. Looks like just another excuse for the socialist grand plan of redistribution of wealth. Man made global warming is sham to top all other shams.
# 25: So, it is a grand capitalist tradition NOT to clean after yourself?
Fat_Anarchy aka Sheep Nut, since you call everyone else a Conspiracy Nut that disagrees with Anthropological Global Warming.
Let us call it what Al Gore & IPCC dubbed it. It is important not to change it to Climate Change, because the climate changes all the time and no one here is stupid enough to deny that. It is also important not to call it Global Warming, because you remove the causality: what causes the warming – so please use it carefully with “anthropological” in front of it. The science as you say, and was re-iterated by 10s of thousand of scientists is that humans cause global warming. There are also 10s of thousand of scientists that say the opposite. The share thought that humans can warm up our globe is a bit magical in my opinion – i think we heavily over-estimate our own impact on CO2 caused warming, and underestimate our impact as far as pollution – chemical crap spewing out, hormones, collection of plastic in the ocean etc..
So why would a country and a government such as Denmark be all for this? One reason could be that the no.1 alternative wind energy company is Danish, the name? Vestas (www.vestas.com).
But let’s look away from this.. i am a sceptic. Not a denier, not a nutcase, not a conspiracy theorist.. I am a sceptic of both sides and have learnt to question authority and analyze strategic positions that companies and individuals take.
Why am i sceptic?
1. Al Gore has invested interest in the carbon trading system. He says something, does something completely different. So do all the attendees according to their transportation mode.
2. Original data is lost.. they deleted it. Why? The hacked data was only 150mb of nearly 20 years of data – storage of this data could not have been an issue. All data should be open to the public and be able to be scrutinized.
4. All of the world’s carbon will be traded on this system, where will this system be placed? What does that mean? The one who controls the system controls the world currency.
5. Carbon in the eyes of these individuals is something criminal.. it is bad because it kills the environment. They believe we should save the world (fair enough). So carbon polluters do something bad.. borderline criminal in these guys eyes. So the solution is to create a system where people can trade this criminal/bad behavior…? even gamble on it.. make derivatives?
Many people liken the stock market to gambling, where you are betting on the future pricing. So here we are, creating a system to reduce carbon, by trading and betting on bad behavior.
In this case we need to invest money in a totally new system, institute a governing body, several oversight and security boards.. while we have a perfectly functioning system already. Wouldn’t it make much more sense to do the same thing as we do with criminal/bad behavior and just punish it? Sanction the idiots who go over their quota, kill em off… no new system, no trading, just fine them and imprison the CEOs and Prime Ministers who fail to meet their quota. We don’t need new taxes.. (another reason why government is for this).
6. How much money is this entire AGW business worth? what is it’s potential worth if this trading system starts working?
7. Specifically for you Fat_Anarchy: Why would government want to support AGW? One suggestion among many would be: A debtor nation without the natural resources and on the verge of desperation to obtain more, wouldn’t want to increase reliance on something they don’t have. Empire building is costly both in people, PR and resources and most empires fail at their empire building.
Countries rich in resources: Russia, China and Africa don’t want to touch this AGW with a ten foot pole.. it means less dependence on them for the future for those specific resources. It is a money game. U.S which is a debtor nation, needs resources from its colonies and is driven to countries by its corporations, because it has no other option.. it can take other resources from smaller countries or become dependent upon other super powers like Russia, China and Africa, who will eat up its wealth. Note that most of the nations for this program are debtor nations.. most surplus nations due to their natural resources and wealth creation are against it or skeptical of it. Best way to remain ahead is to stop the other super-powers progress.. what better way than to stop the reliance upon those valuable resources that make them wealthy?
So what do I believe? I think time should be spent on cleaning up our pollution, before our CO2.. we don’t even make up .5% of the world CO2 emissions, one volcano eruption can contribute more CO2 than entire mankind has ever contributed – BUT we make up 100% of unnatural pollution that mutates nature, kills children and adults alike.
I also wonder how much CO2 would be saved if we stopped war mongering?
My suggestion is to question authority. Ask yourself… who benefits and who is hurt? Look past the veil on both sides. What is more important? What could or would have benefitted from having 5000 journalists pay attention to it for 12 days, more than CO2.. what could have benefited getting all of this funding more than CO2? WOW, the problems we could have solved! Corporations are in the business world to profit… they aren’t there to hug you and protect you and they certainly wouldn’t support this agenda unless it was beneficial to them.
I am not here to question the scientific process.. but from my understanding it wasn’t the scientific process that was followed it was the profit process. What do you think would happened if NASA AGW funding would disappear? If all of those employed by the AGW industry would wake up without a job tomorrow.. yikes! Similarly.. what do you think would happen when 50% of U.S energy industry (coal/oil/gas) woke up tomorrow morning without a job, replaced by a solar panel would say? Let’s face it.. both sides have invested BIG money in their belief; don’t expect either side to disappear without a fight.
Therefore i choose to be sceptic of both, but in the meantime factories keep spewing out chemicals, hormones pumped into feedstock, children using acid to remove metals from computer chips.. but who gives a rats ass, lets save the world from what we breath out CO2.
I’m with Thor- boycott Google! And Yahoo! Down with search engines! And as for that Presidential Climate Action Project- well, let me tell you, I’m not sending them any more cans of soup.
To throw fuel on the fire:
Current temp in Edmonton at 10 am: -29 C (-20 F)
Normal daytime high for this time of year: -4 C (25 F)
We are currently 21 degrees C (45 degrees F) below wher we ‘should’ be.
#27, bip-bop, or should I call you asshole.
No, I didn’t read your whole post. I am not in the mood to read a book of bullshit, thank you.
The science as you say, and was re-iterated by 10s of thousand of scientists is that humans cause global warming. There are also 10s of thousand of scientists that say the opposite.
Isn’t it funny, I keep hearing there are all these “scientists” who disagree but no one knows who they are. Oh, in a pinch they can maybe pull a few names that have been paid for by big coal and those that benefit from CO2. Other names are of “scientists” who know nothing about climate.
i think we heavily over-estimate our own impact on CO2 caused warming,
That is the problem in the denial community. They “think” therefore it becomes a fact. Wrong. You investigate, find the evidence, and prove (either for or against) your theory. In scienbce, you ook for and base conclusions on FACTS, not what you think fits nicely into your little world.
we don’t even make up .5% of the world CO2 emissions, one volcano eruption can contribute more CO2 than entire mankind has ever contributed
Oh, really? And where did you get that idea? I don’t recall any reputable journal ever publishing that. I could be wrong, in which case I would dearly love to see some source for it.
I imagine the rest of your book is just more bullshit.
Reparations for climate damage, paid to the third world, by the first world, will only empower the third world to buy more stuff, use more energy, and have more children-causing a net increase in global carbon emmission rate.
You should know that any “reparations” paid to the 3rd world would be simply be stolen by the current dictator/warlord/scumbag/psychopath that controlled that nation. The 3rd world is 3rd world for a reason and no amount of “do good” socialist bullshit will ever change that.
Hey Mr.Fusion
Thanks for the name calling, greatly appreciate it. Thank you for not reading my entire post, you might have actually learnt something. But nevermind.. i returned the favor and read all of yours.
1. Here is the list of the scientists:
WorldNetDaily reported that 31,000 U.S. scientists – 9,000 with doctorate degrees in atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and other specialties – have signed a petition rejecting global warming.
The list of scientists includes 9,021 Ph.D.s, 6,961 at the master’s level, 2,240 medical doctors and 12,850 carrying a bachelor of science or equivalent academic degree.
You may also check more prominent scientists here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
And read about one of the petitions here: http://www.petitionproject.org/
And here is the prominent list of scientist for AGW (lol): http://motls.blogspot.com/2008/05/31072-american-scientists-against-agw.html
There are also a bunch of other lists that you could check.. but doesn’t look like you spend your time googling information.
2. Here is your data asked about the 0.5%
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
I suggest you check the sources at the bottom of the article because it is taken directly from U.S Department of Energy, EPA etc..
No offense.. but i also learnt that percentage in Environmental Sciences class when taking my B.Sc. It is fairly common knowledge.
As far as the volcanoes go.. yes volcanos are able to spew more CO2 into the upper atmosphere than what we humans have been able to + it adds far worse compounds as well.. sulphur dioxide and hydrogen fluoride blankets that can reduce global temperatures. Watch a bit of discovery channel and you would know that.
Where did all the ice in the Northwest Passage go then?
Sadly because it was newspapers doing it, no one noticed…
Where is all the ice? Some say it is growing elsewhere. Its colder here than it has ever been. Polar Bear population is growing etc.
Who here disagrees that one net/net/net measurement of warming would be the ocean sea level? And who here can deny that sea level has been slowly, gradually, without reverse, going up the last 50 years???
Just asking.
For you Mr.Fusion (while my other post is being accepted by moderator for URL links)
he Super Plumes when they erupt can cause huge warming of the water, changing global climates if under water, or can discharge huge clouds of CO2, which could cover entire continents for years. The Department of Applied Science at New York University has done a study on the Carbon Dioxide release which would come with a Super Plume associated with a mid-Cretaceous size event. There is some evidence of this occurring previously. This would have caused global warming. They have developed a carbonate-silicate cycle model to try to quantify the possible climatic effects of such insanely huge CO2 gas releases. They say;
“utilizing four different formulations for the rate of silicate-rock weathering as a function of atmospheric CO2. We find that CO2 emissions resulting from super-plume tectonics could have produced atmospheric CO2 levels from 3.7 to 14.7 times the modern pre-industrial value of 285 ppm. Based on the temperature sensitivity to CO2 increases used in the weathering-rate formulations, this would cause a global warming of from 2.8 to 7.7 degrees C over today’s global mean temperature. Altered continental positions and higher sea level may have been contributed about 4.8 degrees C to mid-Cretaceous warming. Thus, the combined effects of paleogeographic changes and super-plume related CO2 emissions could be in the range of 7.6 to 12.5 degrees C, within the 6 to 14 degrees C range previously estimated for mid-Cretaceous warming. CO2 releases from oceanic plateaus alone are unlikely to have been directly responsible for more than 20% of the mid-Cretaceous increase in atmospheric CO2.”
Super plume CO2 releases are only one problem associated with such events the devastation to those regions where eruptions occur are in immediate danger of annihilation, from poisonous clouds, Earthquakes, lava flows, etc. If those areas are within high-density populations the issues for loss of life and property make this last Florida’s Hurricane Season look like a pussycat. Perhaps we ought to open our minds and imagination and see what we can do to control our environment and provide protection to Earth’s populations.
Oddly, I don’t feel qualified to doubt or dispute the scientific consensus about global warming, or evolution, or the effectiveness of condoms. WTF is wrong with you crackpots?
Cherman, you have me convinced. It makes absolute sense to believe that you are correct and 98% of the world’s climate scientists are wrong, and are in a coordinated conspiracy.
This is exactly what you have to believe to be a global warming denier.
I have no idea how the deniers’ argument — who are actually claiming that 98% of all climate scientists are lying — is any different from anti-evolutionist arguments.
just like “swine flu” aka mexican flu, aka h1n1…
We’re all learning how to jump through the hoops…training is important