Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Krusher on December 02, 2004, 01:25:21 PM
-
Its an open door to steal.
Link (http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=scienceNews&storyID=6978952)
OSLO (Reuters) - A study of a 2003 heatwave in Europe may give Pacific islanders and environmentalists new ammunition for legal cases blaming the United States for global warming, advocates said on Thursday.
-
"Like tobacco lawsuits, it may take decades to be successful,"
Way to go, lawyers. :rolleyes:
-
Ya know, if this kind of attitude (that which is exhibited by countries around the world towards U.S.) persists I'm afraid eventually enough U.S. citizens will adopt a "screw them" attitude and we could end up with an isolationist attitude reminiscent of the pre-wwii era in America.
-
If we just annex their islands to be used as nuke testgrounds, will their lawsuits go away?
-
Originally posted by eagl
If we just annex their islands to be used as nuke testgrounds, will their lawsuits go away?
lmao guy... thats terrible but damn funny...
we could end up with an isolationist attitude reminiscent of the pre-wwii era in America.
One could only pray for such happenings.. Even if it really were isolationist..
-
Thought it would be interesting to pull up some other threads on the subject.
What Bush said in March 2001 (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/03/29/schroeder.bush/index.html)
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=65997&referrerid=3203
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=16828&referrerid=3203
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=16857&referrerid=3203
-
Kyoto is a crock.
The biggest polluter in the world is not a signitary... China.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Kyoto is a crock.
The biggest polluter in the world is not a signitary... China.
Well duh......
-
You dont have neighbors.:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by GScholz
No, why should we stop polluting when someone else won't?
That's a rather typical selfish way of thinking. My neighbour refuse to clean up his back yard, so I won't bother cleaning up mine ... or stopping the crap from spreading to my other neighbours.
because it's a matter of the fact that our income/way of life depends on our "neighbors" in this situation.
The truth of the matter is that this treaty is economic suicide. Americans ARE willing to clean up but we want it to be fair so that if OUR economy is effected so is the rest of the poluting world. GS the truth of the matter is while America is a poluter by fact, we have more laws preventing polution and regulating industry in our country than any other in the world.
Look at California for instance. When you OVERREGULATE you drive business away and you end up in a bunk economy. Business moves to other states that don't regulate as much. Same goes for the "world economy". If business can manufacture in China for less they will. China will reap the benifits and OVERPOLUTE at the same time.
Now how is that gonna solve the problem?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
No, why should we stop polluting when someone else won't?
That's a rather typical selfish way of thinking. My neighbour refuse to clean up his back yard, so I won't bother cleaning up mine ... or stopping the crap from spreading to my other neighbours.
Its not about pollution GS it never has been, it is all about MONEY. The bottom line with the Kyoto is it is an income redistribution plan.
-
Didn't read the article but will give it a go.
The carbon dioxide then we as humans will produce this year was equilivant to what happened at Mt. St. Helens.
A single volcano eruption produces more CO2 than we do in a year. Human involvment account for well under 10% of the current CO2.
Furthermore, warming and cooling cycles happen. They happened when we weren't here. They happen when we are here despite our contribution.
Kyoto is a farce. There is no direct proof that anything we do will help. Is it worth billions of dollars to try to achieve a maybe?
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Look at California for instance. When you OVERREGULATE you drive business away and you end up in a bunk economy.
You don't know a damn thing about the California economy.
If you don't like it get the hell out.
-
Terry Gerlach, a U.S. Geological Survey Scientist working on Mt St. Helens says that St Helens releases between 500 and 1,000 tons a day of carbon dioxide. He says that worldwide, people and their activities pump 26 billion tons of carbon dioxide a year into the atmosphere. The total from volcanoes is about 200 million tons a year — or less than 1 percent of the man-made emissions.
This still has me scratching my head as to why glaciers have been retreating since the 1800’s, long before the amounts of CO2 released by man were as significant as they appear today.
(http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/images/sperry.gif)
Why the huge retreat of Montana's Sperry Glacier from 1913 to 1927?
-
(http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/images/grinnell.gif )
In this image, it shows that these Montana galaciers seem to have lost half of their 1850 area before WW2.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Terry Gerlach, a U.S. Geological Survey Scientist ...The total from volcanoes is about...or less than 1 percent of the man-made emissions.
This still has me scratching my head as to why glaciers have been retreating since the 1800’s, long before the amounts of CO2 released by man were as significant as they appear today.
I think I can possibly answer this question.
Who exactly does Mr. Terry Gerlach work for? Is it possible that if he found different findings that he and his colleagues might not have such a lucrative government grant to study global warming and the effects that humans have on it?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
No, why should we stop polluting when someone else won't?
That's a rather typical selfish way of thinking. My neighbour refuse to clean up his back yard, so I won't bother cleaning up mine ... or stopping the crap from spreading to my other neighbours.
Maybe you should read up on the agreement first.
You know ... engage brain then open mouth mate.
That kyoto PoS had our government talking about a fart tax on cattle, meanwhile the chinese are spewing god knows what into the atmosphere.
Its ridiculous. And anyone who supports comes out looking like a handsomehunk left-wing tree-hugging whale-humping man-hating vegetarian lesbian (ie you... well maybe not the lesbian bit).
-
Hey GS I belive the analogy you are looking for is more like this:
I will (read: must due to Kyoto law) clean my yard while my chinese neighbor and his 15 children are free to dump smelly poisenous garbage in continously increasing quantities into his yard, my yard, the other neighbors yard and the public street all while enjoying more free time and resources not spent cleaning to get rich instead of to cleaning like me.
But hey, you do get to be morally superior!
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Thought it would be interesting to pull up some other threads on the subject.
What Bush said in March 2001 (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/03/29/schroeder.bush/index.html)
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=65997&referrerid=3203
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=16828&referrerid=3203
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=16857&referrerid=3203
Thanks Rip,
I just finished reading the old links btw very interesting.
-
we act like we have a second earth ready after this one
is exhaust.
But hey our children children will have to live with it, not we!
-
Originally posted by Montezuma
You don't know a damn thing about the California economy.
If you don't like it get the hell out.
Like/Dislike is irrelevent. What I did was make an "analagy" to what happened to CAs Economy. If you don't like it don't post!
-
isn't there a site somewhere that breaks down different forms of pollution by a per capita form? I seen it once and it seemed to show that even tho the U.S. is the most productive of countries it is far down on percapita pollution in most cases.
If money were not the reason for wanting us in then it would seem that bringing all the other countries up to at least our standards first would be the most logical.
lazs
-
The EU (which ratified the Kyoto Protocol and thus faces mandatory emission reductions) has reduced energy intensity by only 7.5 % compared to the 15.8% percent reduction achieved by the USA over the 1992- 2001 period. Similarly, the ratio of CO2 emissions per dollar of output has decreased faster in the U.S. than in the EU over the past decade, 15.3% for the USA compared to 13.8% in Europe. By adopting a voluntary approach to emission reductions, the Bush Administration balances multiple policy objectives, including maintaining strong economic growth and enhanced environmental quality. In contrast, economic growth in the EU is weak and unemployment is high - about 10% in recent years.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
(http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/images/grinnell.gif )
In this image, it shows that these Montana galaciers seem to have lost half of their 1850 area before WW2.
I blame Boosh.
-
This still has me scratching my head as to why glaciers have been retreating since the 1800’s, long before the amounts of CO2 released by man were as significant as they appear today.
The "Little Iceage" which started in the 1500's didn't completely end till the mid-1800's.
-
Originally posted by slimm50
Ya know, if this kind of attitude (that which is exhibited by countries around the world towards U.S.) persists I'm afraid eventually enough U.S. citizens will adopt a "screw them" attitude and we could end up with an isolationist attitude reminiscent of the pre-wwii era in America.
Yeah, here's hoping.
-
Nearly all other countries in the world support the theory that global warming is caused by the actions of the humans. Do you believe that the reason for this is the envy towards USA?
-
Originally posted by Krusher
The EU (which ratified the Kyoto Protocol and thus faces mandatory emission reductions) has reduced energy intensity by only 7.5 % compared to the 15.8% percent reduction achieved by the USA over the 1992- 2001 period. Similarly, the ratio of CO2 emissions per dollar of output has decreased faster in the U.S. than in the EU over the past decade, 15.3% for the USA compared to 13.8% in Europe. By adopting a voluntary approach to emission reductions, the Bush Administration balances multiple policy objectives, including maintaining strong economic growth and enhanced environmental quality. In contrast, economic growth in the EU is weak and unemployment is high - about 10% in recent years.
Comparing percentage is never a good idea.
Plus often it as no sense at all.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Hey GS I belive the analogy you are looking for is more like this:
I will (read: must due to Kyoto law) clean my yard while my chinese neighbor and his 15 children are free to dump smelly poisenous garbage in continously increasing quantities into his yard, my yard, the other neighbors yard and the public street all while enjoying more free time and resources not spent cleaning to get rich instead of to cleaning like me.
But hey, you do get to be morally superior!
You forgot to add:
And every time I fart I pay him $1000 to put up with the smell.
-
so we all agree that the U.S. is a good example of what everyone else should be doing but the only reason that we want the U.S. involved is not for their superior programs and efforts and teaching.... but to punish them by making them pay for the pollution of others?
lazs
-
Question:
Would the treatie subject US business to different guidelines than the rest of the world? Or would it be uniform pollution control for all countrys?
-
Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
Question:
Would the treatie subject US business to different guidelines than the rest of the world? Or would it be uniform pollution control for all countrys?
There would not be uniform polution regulation. Countries like China and India would have far lower standards to meet than the west despite the fact they are traditionaly heavy poluters allready with a low regard for the environment and despite the fact they are now undergoing tremendous economic and industrial growth - historically the period when a nation pollutes the worst and produces the worst ecological disdasters. These nations would get these lower pollution control advantages while they compete with the west in the global economy. It gives them a huge ecomomic advantage.
Thats why Kyoto is stupid...
-
Originally posted by lazs2
so we all agree that the U.S. is a good example of what everyone else should be doing but the only reason that we want the U.S. involved is not for their superior programs and efforts and teaching.... but to punish them by making them pay for the pollution of others?
lazs
pay for your own handsomehunk superior polluting machines...
arrogance Laz sure seems to run rampant in your blood...
-
That's a loaded question thedude...
You could say just as easily that a rule universally applied that requires countries to ship goods through one port in one country is "fair" because it applies to everyone, regardless of the fact that it would affect every country differently.
Asking China to cut 10% of it's pollution is going to have a completely different effect and cost than telling the US to also cut 10%. Again, how do you measure fairness?
You have to look at the costs and the results gained through the use of either mandatory or country-specific measures. We know we have to cut pollution, duh. It's not a suprise. What we don't need is a bunch of people in a country that doesn't use coal to tell us we can't burn coal here. We don't need countries with no beef exports to speak of telling us we need to tax cow farts. Just because the tax is "universal" doesn't mean it is fair or even will have the intended consequences.
The world needs a good cupful of STFU when it comes to this treaty. Take a peek at the CO and CO2 maps generated by the latest climate satellites and target the hotspots, not just the guy with the biggest wallet. Maybe spend some time actually doing something about the lunatics cutting down and burning Brazil's rainforests for example... Not one of those countries complaining about the kyoto treaty has a clean environmental record, whether it's excessive logging, overfishing, fishing practices that needlessly kill off non-targeted animal populations, or whatever. They're trying to deflect attention away from themselves to what they see as an easy target.
Want to know how much we give a crap? Take a look at the high exchange rate and you'll know how big a finger we're flipping the rest of the world. We're making it expensive for Americans to buy foreign goods, plain and simple. 1.95 pound/dollar exchange rate? I guess we don't buy that brit stuff anymore. Sure it will have a short term depressive effect on the US but after normal market forces result in us entrenching ourselves against the bad exchange rate, we'll be stronger than ever and even more able to dispense those portions of STFU.
We don't need most of the rest of the world, and that pisses everyone off a great deal because they know it's true. We just happen to have a president who's at least partially willing to say "Take your charity handouts and STFU." You can always say no... Many countries do and they prosper as well as they should.
-
sorry slo but I don't get what you are saying... if we pollute less per capita than other countries shouldn't we expect other countries to pay to at least get to our level before we have to all go to a new level. It seems insane to make those who pollute the least per capita while producing the most to go to even higher standards or.... worse yet.... pay for everyone elses mess.
This seems like some kind of one world socialism where those who have worked the hardedst and done the most are punished and drug down.
lazs
-
Originally posted by ra
The "Little Iceage" which started in the 1500's didn't completely end till the mid-1800's.
What did we do to cause the Little Ice Age?
What did we do to end the Little Ice Age?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
What did we do to cause the Little Ice Age?
What did we do to end the Little Ice Age?
Take a pill. I'm pointing out that comparing today's temperature or glacier size to the temperature or glacier sizes of the 1800's is meaningless.
-
If it is meaningless to compare climate of 50 or 100 years ago to today, how do you know it is changing? Glaciation is an indicator of climate.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Kyoto is a crock.
The biggest polluter in the world is not a signitary... China.
China signed 29/05/1998, ratified it 17/12/02. Start again. Think carefully.
-
china would be dumb to not sign... all they have to do is sign and wait for all the money to pour in from the other signators who will help them "get up to speed" oh wait.... the money won't pour in until you get the U.S. to sign up...
lazs
-
I stopped believing in man made global warming some time ago. Many others have come round to that attitude recently too. People more expert than me. That there is some warming going on at the moment is hard to deny. But it happens every now and then with or without human intervention. It would be fascinating to see a cold spell arrive and see how they manage to explain that away.
I actually hope these foolish court cases go ahead. Quite likely they will highlight the absurdity of the envinronmental zealots once and for all. Cold hard facts needed for a viable court case. Far too many 'green' facts are closer to religious faith than science.
To be fair the USA does need to do more in terms of reducing the output of pollution and reducing energy consumption. For it's own good if nothing else.
-
to be fair... I believe that the U.S. produces less pollution per capita than say Ireland.
And... that is living in well heated and cooled large houses and driving comfortable cars with affordable fuel. To be fair... I believe the U.S. has higher pollution standards than most if not all other countries.
lazs
-
Kyoto hasn't been any fairer with Finland.
Finland has been ways ahead rest of the europe at reducing the harmful industrial emissions.
No bonus for that, just the same rules as with rest of the europe, where the industry hasn't had so good technology which reduces emissions.
Way to go Kyoto, really fair.
Still Finland is part of it.
Oh well, maybe the finnish companies which were working on the technology, will get benefit of the central european industry, which has to look for ways to reduce the emissions.
-
We will probably go through with it, even if everyone else drops out.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
to be fair... I believe that the U.S. produces less pollution per capita than say Ireland.
And... that is living in well heated and cooled large houses and driving comfortable cars with affordable fuel. To be fair... I believe the U.S. has higher pollution standards than most if not all other countries.
lazs
According to the OECD (http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/62/2958142.pdf), if you're talking emissions (and Kyoto is about emissions):
US per capita
SOx 62.7
NOx 84.4
CO 313.8
Particulates 10.1
VOC 57.8
Ireland per capita
SOx 42.2
NOx 31.8
CO 76.1
Particulates ..
VOC 25.4
Australia & Canada are worse polluters (and Norway on VOCs)per capita in the Greenhouse stuff in the OECD. Outside of the OECD there's also Bahrain and Qatar, probably due to the disproportionately large Oil & Gas business compared to the population.
The US does much better on the particulates score in the OECD table, although it's a bit speculative, because there's a lot of "no data" entries in the particulate column, and "the size of the particulates being measured varies from country to country". The US particulate figures - like several others - only measure the large PM10 particulates, which excludes the nastier stuff.
The OECD also note that in the US figures, "emissions from natural sources, agriculture and forestry, fugitive dust, prescribed burning and other fires are excluded" - which as far as I can make out, are the causes that account for the vast majority of PM10 particulates. Whether or not the other countries also do this is unclear - the notes do not overtly mention it.
-
What is VOC ?
-edit- nevermind... found it.
-
Volatile Organic Compounds...
beat me to it :)
-
Yup -dead- :)
I had some bad cabbage last year and it shows.
-
Btw dead..
I like your hat, but you look abit skinny. Want me to send you some food?
-
Originally posted by -dead-
China signed 29/05/1998, ratified it 17/12/02. Start again. Think carefully.
Oops my bad, apparently China is a "developing" country which makes it even worse.
The whole thing is a stinking joke.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
If it is meaningless to compare climate of 50 or 100 years ago to today, how do you know it is changing? Glaciation is an indicator of climate.
Where did I say I know it's changing?
-
Okay... should have said how do "We" know...
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Oops my bad, apparently China is a "developing" country which makes it even worse.
The whole thing is a stinking joke.
got any better ideas to save us from drowning in our own filth?
-
Originally posted by vorticon
got any better ideas to save us from drowning in our own filth?
Yep. Western countries paying a very high economic cost only to drown in ever incresing free Chinese and Indian filth!
You may have heard of thisd solution, it's called the Kyoto treaty...
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Yep. Western countries paying a very high economic cost only to drown in ever incresing free Chinese and Indian filth!
You may have heard of thisd solution, it's called the Kyoto treaty...
wait, so because the kyoto treaty is flawed, it shouldent be done. but since missile defence is flawed, and even dangerous, it should be done?
:lol
-
Missile defense is paid for by my money, for my benefit. Koyoto is paid for by my money, at my detriement and for someone elses benefit.
-
still... it seems that the U.S. is very low in overall emissions especially considering it's productivity... what exactly does Ireland produce for all the pollution they make?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
still... it seems that the U.S. is very low in overall emissions especially considering it's productivity... what exactly does Ireland produce for all the pollution they make?
lazs
Drunken catholic schoolgirls
-
Originally posted by stiehl
Drunken catholic schoolgirls
I'll toast to that. Here, here.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Btw dead..
I like your hat, but you look abit skinny. Want me to send you some food?
I dunno, will the food make me grow flowers on my hat?
-
Originally posted by -dead-
I dunno, will the food make me grow flowers on my hat?
Depends on what you eat i guess. Try some seeds and a glass of water for starters.