This is why, despite the fact that I agree reducing carbon output is a positive good, I will start to act like it is a crisis when the people claiming it is a crisis start acting like it is a crisis.
This is why Dhimmicrats are indifferent to Arab agression towards Israel, it's good for the environment!
Oh man I'm SO embarrassed! Seems Indonesia has planted trees to gobble up all that CO2 generated. My bad
Yeah, because there'd never be a reason to plant trees and ask people to fly commercial, or to teleconference. They should only "offset" the carbon caused by the excess of wealthy do-gooders and not try and "offset" normal everyday carbon emissions, which as we know will end all humanity if we don't do something to stop it.
Man, I agree with you on this. It's really absurd. I'm happy that they planted the trees and everything, but private planes are the epitome of wastefulness. Is flying first class really so much of a burden?
Well they'd better plant more, Indonesia has a deplorable environmental record and leads the world in deforestization. It is pretty sad the UN is even holding global warming talks there.
Bo, I have said this before and will continue to say it. While I agree that reducing carbon emmissions is a positive good in its own right, I will starting believing this is a crisis when the people telling me it is a crisis start acting like it is a crisis.
It only gets worse: 10,000 people jetting into a conference to do nothing but generate a report and say 'harumpf' to each other? I picked the wrong career.
PJ O'Rourke, commenting on the Rio environmental conference in 1992, thought the real purpose of such conferences is to allow Third World politicans to ride in motorcades and feel important -- normally the only time they get such treatment is when being driven to their execution after a coup.
I can't believe this! This was going to be one of my carbon offset companies. Do these stupid bird-huggers not understand that the migratory birds are doomed anyway if we don’t do something about global warming? I guess its back to child labor in India. It’s cheaper and no one really cares.
Re: Global Warming Foolishness Pope Benedict XVI has weighed in on the issue; stomping the Goracle's foolishness and issuing wise counsel on the issue... "Pope Benedict XVI has launched a surprise attack on climate change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology. The leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics suggested that fears over man-made emissions melting the ice caps and causing a wave of unprecedented disasters were nothing more than scare-mongering. The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement… “It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions, and above all with the aim of reaching agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances." God bless...
If caffeine was an essential ingredient to bring about the Industrial Revolution, and the Industrial Revolution brought about global warming, then… that’s it… caffeine is bringing us to the brink of disaster!
This nation's arch-enemy at it again... hide your children! Gore blames U.S. for blocking climate talks
Consensus. The debate is over. Open letter to the UN: List of signatories. Oh, wait. Timothy Ball is on there so the whole thing doesn't count. Nevermind.
But considering that the US were allready poluting far more per person thn just about any oter country that is hardly anything to be proud of.
I fail to see how that has anything to do with limiting polusion. i mean is your argument we are richer so shud be allowed to polute more ?
Not what I said, so try again. But even so take a look at the numbers for the signatories of Kyoto and tell me where they are in relation to '97 and tell me whether they have met their number. Quick question. China now emits more CO2 than the US but with a population about three times more than the US, their 'per person' number will be much lower. Does that give them a free ride? Of course China will never sign anything like Kyoto anyway, so it is in fact a trick question.