Canada blocks Commonwealth climate-change deal

[Wilber]

I'm not entirely sure that Harper really will pressure other countries to become involved. It seems this is more of a strategy to do nothing.

Then nothing will have changed from the previous administration.

[White Doors]

It seems to me that cleaning up our air is the most importatant thing. Especially for those who suffer from the bad air. So changing emissions on things costs money, all that money will not make us healthier, clean air would be a start.

Agreed, but CO2 is NOT a pollutant. It is plant food. Let's take the toxins out of the air, not the plant food.

[Fortunata]

It is plant food. Let's take the toxins out of the air, not the plant food.

We're overfeeding.

[stignasty]

There was a PBS documentary on Nova a couple of months ago called "Dimming the Sun." Its seems that by taking the pollutants out of the atmosphere we're allowing more sunlight in, which is more likely to accelerate warming.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sun/

[White Doors]

There was a PBS documentary on Nova a couple of months ago called "Dimming the Sun." Its seems that by taking the pollutants out of the atmosphere we're allowing more sunlight in, which is more likely to accelerate warming.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sun/

Yeah, I watched that too. But so what? I'd rather the earth get warmer (assuming they are correct) than to poison it. The Earth is used to getting warmer and colder.

[jdobbin]

His arguments are clear. None of the so-called 'rebuttles' you posted address his core argument - they choose to focus on irrelevant details or use data which has be since shown to be wrong. You simply wish to ignore it because you have drunk the global warming kool aid.

And you've chosen not to believe what the majority of scientists on the subject have said. Even Harper is not saying that global warming isn't happening or that emissions don't need to come down. He just isn't prepared to go to bat for it.

[jdobbin]

Cherry pick data? He takes the time to explain how the cherry picked data has been used to sell GW. Watch all four parts, with the sound on this time.

Why wasn't it again that polar bears don't exist?

I've watched all four parts and seen rebuttals to all four parts.

http://www.hells-handmaiden.com/2007/08/24...ortune-telling/

I've also seen where Carter dismisses reports that he gets paid by Exxon and General Motors to make speeches and then see a report in Australian newspapers that his organization got $95,000 from those companies.

You'll probably say "don't shoot the messenger" but there isn't a point he makes that I haven't seen countered.

[jdobbin]

And it is for the Liberals? It certainly wasn't when they were in power.

No, they did a terrible job on getting to work on greenhouse gases. It now seems Harper wants to continue that poor performance.

[jdobbin]

Then nothing will have changed from the previous administration.

Not something that Harper should be proud of. In fact, he seems to be trying to go backwards.

[jdobbin]

No they actually don't.

Sorry, you are wrong.

[margrace]

Its always been an old argument, when someone does something wrong they try to justify it by blaming someone else, he did so why can't I. This seems to be the only way Harper knows to act. He is a total lose

[Wilber]

Not something that Harper should be proud of. In fact, he seems to be trying to go backwards.

How can you go backwards from nothing, unless you consider a 30% increase in emmisions under the Liberals after Kyoto was signed going backwards.

[jdobbin]

1998 the warmest year? Only if believe James Hansen and J.Dobbin.

It changed the data very insignificantly. In fact, prior to 2001, the report had said that 1934 was marginally warmer than 1998.

I have a lot more faith in Hansen and the consensus of science behind him that I do with Carter.

[jdobbin]

How can you go backwards from nothing, unless you consider a 30% increase in emmisions under the Liberals after Kyoto was signed going backwards.

I think going backwards would be to see the numbers skyrocket even higher under Harper's "aspirational" goals and cancelling or reducing programs already in place on alternate energies, pollution recovery and building efficiency.

Edited November 26, 2007 by jdobbin

[Keepitsimple]

It changed the data very insignificantly. In fact, prior to 2001, the report had said that 1934 was marginally warmer than 1998.

I have a lot more faith in Hansen and the consensus of science behind him that I do with Carter.

It just ticks me off to see how so much attention was drawn to the year 1998 - Canada's hottest year - counting from 1948 - and was recorded as being 1.8 degrees celsius over the "norm". What you never hear is that 1999 ranked as the 15th hottest since 1948 at only .7 over the norm and the year 2000 was way down at number 23 - only .3 over the norm. 2004 was even further back at number 37. When you look at the numbers, 1998 was clearly an anomoly that had it's own specific reasons for an unusual deviation. So...is there really an unusual warming going on that is outside of the natural Climate Change that's been going on for millenia.......kinda hard to tell, isn't it?

Here's a National Temperatures table from Environment Canada:

http://www.msc-smc.ec.gc.ca/ccrm/bulletin/...007&rows=60

[Riverwind]

I've watched all four parts and seen rebuttals to all four parts.

http://www.hells-handmaiden.com/2007/08/24...ortune-telling/

Again. These rebuttles completely evade the core point: significant climate change has occurred in the past without the assistance of humans therefore it not reasonable to claim that the current evidence of GW must be a result of human activity. Edited November 26, 2007 by Riverwind

[jdobbin]

Again. These rebuttles completely evade the core point: significant climate change has occurred in the past without the assistance of humans therefore it not reasonable to claim that the current evidence of GW must be a result of human activity.

I don't think anyone hasn't said that warming and cooling trends have taken place over the planet's history. However, the increasing presence of human activity is producing more greenhouse gases which are responsible and going to be responsible for increasing the planet's heat.

The right wing continues to deny that this is happening or if it is happening, is not a bad thing.

I think Canadians are right to question what Harper believes and what he will do about it. It seems that he is supported by many in the right wing who deny emissions are an issue and this probably motivates his foot dragging.

[jdobbin]

So...is there really an unusual warming going on that is outside of the natural Climate Change that's been going on for millenia.......kinda hard to tell, isn't it?

Here's a National Temperatures table from Environment Canada:

You also have to look at when the seasons change as well. Increasingly, winter roads in the north are starting later and ending earlier due to warmer temperatures. Scientists now look at how long the cold lasts compared to other years. There may not be the same temperature fluctuation but there is a difference in the length of time for warmer days.

[Oleg Bach]

You also have to look at when the seasons change as well. Increasingly, winter roads in the north are starting later and ending earlier due to warmer temperatures. Scientists now look at how long the cold lasts compared to other years. There may not be the same temperature fluctuation but there is a difference in the length of time for warmer days.

PRIME MINISTER- translation - first servant..we own him- apparently little Stevie Hockey Puck does not get it. To clear up this climate "change" or destruction issue - it is not a case of warming or cooling - remember the old days when we talked about a thing called "pollution" - that's what it is about - dirt - of all kinds in the air and water. If you had a family member that peed in the soup pot - you most certainly would have to correct them. This is no different - if pollution of all kinds was cleared up - we would see bluer skys almost instantly - the planet would heal almost instantly - so what's holding every one up - time to wash the dishes and the floor..I am not interested personally in some perlonged debate that is a straw man argument - we have filthed up the planet and those that grew rich doing it - don't want to do the house work - our prime servant - Mr. Harper has been instructed not to serve....parliment should stand up and correct young Mr. Harper our first servant and the butler of the house called Canada - and the estate called world.

[jbg]

1998 has been the warmest year on record in the past 150 years so it is misleading to pick that one year and say the planet has cooled since.

So uh, if 1998 has been the warmest year on record - in 150 years - then uh, what made 1848 warmer?

Fossil fuel emissions?

And didn't it turn out that there were warmer years during the 1930's?

[jbg]

It changed the data very insignificantly. In fact, prior to 2001, the report had said that 1934 was marginally warmer than 1998.

I have a lot more faith in Hansen and the consensus of science behind him that I do with Carter.

Ironically, New York City's coldest reading ever was on February 9, 1934, where the temperature bottomed at -15F (real temperature units) or around -22 Trudeau Units. Many cold weather records were smashed that month. My point is that if that one freak event was removed, 1934 would be on the books as being even warmer.

Even if you're correct, jdobbin, that would make the 1934-date period trendless.

[jbg]

When you look at the numbers, 1998 was clearly an anomoly that had it's own specific reasons for an unusual deviation.

1998 featured both an extremely strong El Nino and an absence of NAO "blocking". Further, the placement of the mean upper air trough was such that there were no significant cooling events, so temperatures exceeded those of the 1972-3 and 1982-3 El Ninos.

Normally, El Nino's strongest warming effects are in the Upper Midwest and adjoining parts of Canada. Indeed, International Falls, Minnesota experienced a "brown Christmas" that year. Because of the aforementioned NAO and troughing situations, the normal coolness of an El Nino in the Deep South of the US did not occur.

[Moxie]

How can you go backwards from nothing, unless you consider a 30% increase in emmisions under the Liberals after Kyoto was signed going backwards.

Harper is following the Liberal Party of Canada's example, he's doing nothing. Zip nadda was the liberal way for 13 years, but but but now they are outraged that he's not signing on to Kyoto why?

[trex]

All those glaciers breaking up in such a short time must be our imagination.

[noahbody]

You also have to look at when the seasons change as well. Increasingly, winter roads in the north are starting later and ending earlier due to warmer temperatures. Scientists now look at how long the cold lasts compared to other years. There may not be the same temperature fluctuation but there is a difference in the length of time for warmer days.

You still haven't told me why polar bears don't exist?