Kyoto Protocol

Author Message   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 397 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Thursday, September 10, 2009 - 07:46 pm:    I can assure you Revolter that no direct implication was meant. Looking at a previous post, I would also like to make it clear that I am in no way implying that Yorkshire is responsible for Global Warming. Boy. As I said before, I see NO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that man is responsible for global warming. But plenty to say that he is not. Lets agree to disagree on this occasion   Revolter Member Username: Revolt Post Number: 184 Registered: 10-2006 Posted on Thursday, September 10, 2009 - 10:02 am:    Justa. Please explain your Birmingham remarks. It does not seem clear from your post whether or not you were being ironic or witty. I like to think you were. But then again, I am a Brummie.   The Boy Member Username: The_boy Post Number: 119 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Thursday, September 10, 2009 - 09:23 am:    "It's not humor, it was hyperbole." What, even the tired stereotype that Brummies are thick? In answer to your question about Lenin's birthday - no, I don't think there is any implied significance. What is your evidence that "it would appear that man has very little impact on global warming"?   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 396 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - 08:06 pm:    It's not humor, it was hyperbole. It would be absolutey shocking if we lost the Netherlands. Where would Peter Pan move to?   The Boy Member Username: The_boy Post Number: 118 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - 05:31 pm:    "The majority of people posting on here will be quite well educated (even those from Birmingham" "it would appear ( and confirm what I have said already) that man has very little impact on global warming. If I'm wrong, at worst we lose Holland." Yet more top class 'humour', Justa. (Don't) keep it up.   devonboy Member Username: Morgan144 Post Number: 49 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - 01:41 pm:    I always thought 42 was the answer. Now it seems to be 350! I am so confused! Anyway, to the subject in hand.......global warming isa continual process that has been going on for millenia. Previous "civilisations" - and I use the phrase adisedly, have come and gone on the back of fluctuations in climate resulting in crop damage and so on. Our "civilisation" appears to be possibly next in line. The difference this time is that we are undoubtedly contibuting to our own demise. By the time we finish deforesting, over fishing, consuming fossil fuels etc etc there will be little left worth saving anyway. Or is all to do with farting cows?   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 395 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Tuesday, September 08, 2009 - 10:17 pm:    Boy, that day is Lenin's Birthday. Any particular significant?   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 394 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Tuesday, September 08, 2009 - 09:56 pm:    I would not go as far as saying they have been 'bought'. I just have a scenario in my head whereby some University students looking for funding to examine camels (for example) and are struggling to get said funding, may have thought "lets say we are examining the impact of climate change on camels" and have found enough funding to keep them in Budwieser and Pringles for the next three years. By then they are too afraid to say that, 'actually, it has bugger all effect', and then look for 'evidence' or make tenous hypothesis to support funding for further work, and therefore more Bud and Pringles. They cannot deny a link without suffering either a finacial penalty/loss of employment (and Pringles). And because it's 'scientific evidence', the proleteriat are inclined to believe it. This is then spread to other students as an easy way to get funding, hey presto, pyramid theories. I may also be wrong The majority of people posting on here will be quite well educated (even those from Birmingham) and will have their own theories about global warming. I am prepared to bet a sandwich of your choice that they harbour some doubts about whether people are the real problem! What is clear (in my own mind), is that we just do not know. In regards to the link you posted, it would appear ( and confirm what I have said already) that man has very little impact on global warming. If I'm wrong, at worst we lose Holland. I'll go and fire up the patio heaters now   The Boy Member Username: The_boy Post Number: 117 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Tuesday, September 08, 2009 - 10:05 am:    '24 October, 2009 will be historic--a day when the world came together to take a stand for our future. In every corner of the planet, people will organize 350 actions. Here's the plan: we're asking you, and people in every country on earth, to organize an action in their community on October 24. There are no limits here--imagine bike rides, rallies, concerts, hikes, festivals, tree-plantings, protests, and more. Imagine your action linking up with thousands of others around the globe. Imagine the world waking up. If there was ever a time for you to get involved, it's right now. There are two reasons this year is so crucial. The first reason is that the science of climate change is getting darker by the day. The Arctic is melting away with astonishing speed, decades ahead of schedule. Everything on the planet seems to be melting or burning, rising or parched. And we now have a number to express our peril: 350. NASA's James Hansen and a team of other scientists recently published a series of papers showing that we need to cut the amount of carbon in the atmosphere from its current 387 parts per million to 350 or less if we wish to "maintain a planet similar to that on which civilization developed." No one knew that number a year ago—but now it's clear that 350 might well be the most important number for the future of the planet, a north star to guide our efforts as we remake the world. If we can swiftly get the planet on track to get to 350, we can still avert the worst effects of climate change. The second reason 2009 is so important is that the political opportunity to influence our governments has never been greater. The world's leaders will meet in Copenhagen this December to craft a new global treaty on cutting carbon emissions. If that meeting were held now, it would produce a treaty that would be woefully inadequate. In fact, it would lock us into a future where we'd never get back to 350 parts per million—where the rise of the sea would accelerate, where rainfall patterns would start to shift and deserts to grow. A future where first the poorest people, and then all of us, and then all the people that come after us, would find the only planet we have damaged and degraded. October 24 comes six weeks before those crucial UN meetings in Copenhagen. If we all do our job, every nation will know the question they'll be asked when they put forth a plan: will this get the planet back on the path to 350? Contact Us: http://www.350.org/contact'   papa_chango Member Username: Papa_chango Post Number: 534 Registered: 12-2005 Posted on Tuesday, September 08, 2009 - 09:35 am:    Justa TPO----- Are thinking that scientists are in the pockets of big corporations and say what they have to say. James Lovelock is an Independent scientist in the pay of no one. If the salt conveyor, the Gulfstream, stopped then we are in trouble and he says it might if the ice continues to melt. But as you say he could be wrong. http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0130-11.htm   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 393 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Monday, September 07, 2009 - 09:51 pm:    Unless they have changed the laws of physics since I left school, I'm struggling with the concept of ice melting at -40. That's the average mean temperature at the Poles if I'm not mistaken. The climate change has been going on for thousands of millions of years, however, people are focusing on just several hundrend years. In the lifespan of Earth, this is nothing more than a snapshot. It's like trying to extrapolate the plot of Casablanca from two cords of 'as time goes by'. And this is being passed of as sacrosanct! Oh, and lets not forget about the new 'green' lightbulbs. That's the ones full of mercury in case you did not know. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6211261.ece Bit of a phyrric victory if you ask me.   papa_chango Member Username: Papa_chango Post Number: 533 Registered: 12-2005 Posted on Monday, September 07, 2009 - 09:17 pm:    Justa TPO------- the Sea is rising, that's the trick. Co2 melts the ice at the North pole and up it comes, the sea that is. Well that's what James Lovelock says. I kinda agree with what you are saying.   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 392 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Monday, September 07, 2009 - 08:08 pm:    If you can show me empirical evidence, then I am prepared to be persuaded. At the moment, we have the old 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' debate by men in beards wearing sandals (the men, not the beards). And Al Gore, a man so stupid he come second to Dubya. For every website claiming to uphold the findings of climatologists, there are an equal number who offer conflicting evidence. Thats not to say that we should not be trying to lead a 'green' life. This is something I endorse fully. However, this is due to saving money and what little fuel we have left on the planet. I am not fully convinced that this recycling malarky is cost effective given that the energy consumed by the infastructure needed to recylce a bottle far outweighs any nett gain. My view is that this is a ploy by local councils to meet targets set by the EU. I may be wrong and again am prepared to be 're-educated'. Even George Monbiot will agree that CO2 was around long before the invention of Yorkshire Electricity Company, and recent (10 years) studies indicate that the planet has been getting colder-again this undermines the postulations of global warming enthusiasts and indeed any claims of increasing weather temparature. The final nail in the coffin, is when I look outside the window and see our 'BBQ summer'. If the climatologists cannot predict what the weather is going to be like in six months time, what chance do they have of predicting it in 60 years?   The Boy Member Username: The_boy Post Number: 116 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Monday, September 07, 2009 - 03:49 pm:    "This global warming is down, in the main, to the rise of CO2. This being a natural by-product of breathing..." Justa - Do you believe that global warming has nothing to do with humans sending millions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere?   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 391 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Sunday, September 06, 2009 - 08:41 pm:    Pipling, is it true that the rise in HIV/Aids in Africa is due to the some 'decree' by the Pope regarding condoms/birth control? I always thought that was a fallacy.   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 390 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Sunday, September 06, 2009 - 02:22 pm:    Given that it straddles the equator, the lack of precipitation is not an unexpected consequence. And whilst many people may think this is due to global warming, you have to take into account that many people also think they can sing. The X Factor would dispell these beliefs. (The French guy being a case in point, but there was also a woman on last week who claimed she was from Greece, but I doubt that as she did not have a moustache). Moving on and coming back to point, we can think what we want, it does not make it true. You of all people know that. I have my own theory. This global warming is down, in the main, to the rise of CO2. This being a natural by-product of breathing. Now, it's impossible to stop breathing, even Spike would agree with me on that one, so how do we manage the CO2? Plankton removes 50billion tonnes of CO2 every year from the atmosphere, by far one on the biggest 'processer' on the planet. Unfortunately it is being eaten by whales in ever increasing amounts. I propose that we cut down some trees, and make them into harpoons..... Next week, how do we solve a problem like Korea?   pipling Member Username: Reality Post Number: 257 Registered: 05-2006 Posted on Sunday, September 06, 2009 - 10:10 am:    Justa, I do know about Malaria and HIV having travelled extensively in Africa. I can also say that huge areas of Africa has been experiencing a terrible drought for the last five years that receives little media coverage in the West. There is little water available and many people now think its due to climate change due to human actions. People do die as a result of global warming and many more will do so in future as the effects kick in over the next century.   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 389 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Friday, September 04, 2009 - 07:10 pm:    I think you'll find that the biggest cause of deaths in Africa is Malaria. Followed by HIV/AIDS. And those mosquitoes have been around for bloody long time (see Jurrassic Park ), and no matter how many Toyota Prius and wind generators are sold, they will be there in the future. HIV, who knows where that will end. However, I accept that, in some strange eco-mentalists opinion and skewed mindset, HIV may, just may, have been due to global warming. Possibly the result of a Range Rover mating with a Mini. Who knows.   pipling Member Username: Reality Post Number: 255 Registered: 05-2006 Posted on Friday, September 04, 2009 - 04:18 pm:    Justa TPO 'People die due to wars, not so with global warming' .....been to Africa recently?   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 383 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Sunday, August 16, 2009 - 08:56 pm:    Ohh Myob, a bit contentious. People die due to wars, not so with global warming - but I get your point. $26m daily is a colossal amount of money, but it's only taxpayers money so it does not count. It will just raise the tax on cigarettes and alcohol, two easy targets. That said, the US have a history of hitting the wrong targets.....   Myob Member Username: Psiman Post Number: 447 Registered: 07-2006 Posted on Saturday, August 15, 2009 - 10:02 pm:    On a similar note, US "defence" spending since 1945 has totalled (at a very conservative estimate) well over $19 trillion. This would roughly equate to $26m PER DAY since year 1 CE. I wonder if that could have been better spent?!   justa TPO Member Username: Justa_tpo Post Number: 382 Registered: 06-2006 Posted on Friday, August 14, 2009 - 09:07 pm:    Was reading recently (obviously in a broadsheet where only facts are given), that the money spend on the Kyoto Treaty (to date) would be the same as it would cost to provide clean running water for everyone in the World. Money well spent then.

Administration Log Out   Previous Page Next Page