Copenhagen Climate Treaty

[scribblet]

Looks like the treaty to be presented at Copenhagen has been scooped, surprise surprise, it is not about climate, it's nothing but a backdoor world socialist government document aimed at bringing about "economic equality" by taking the western economies down to 3rd-world status.

If implemented, forget about Canada ever running a budget surplus again. The full text is available as a 2 megabyte, 181 page pdf document at

http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com...nhagen-2009.pdf

Some contest: Page 62

36. All Parties, except for the least developed countries and small island developing States, shall develop and regularly update and submit a national inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol.

Page 122

17. [[Developed [and developing] countries] [Developed and developing

country Parties] [All Parties] [shall] [should]:]

(a) Compensate for damage to the LDCs' economy and also compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity, as many will become environmental refugees;

b. Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.

No mention of how we should be able to come up with the money, to do so is a given that we will be in a depression. If we sign on to it, kiss economic recovery good-bye.

[Riverwind]

Looks like the treaty to be presented at Copenhagen has been scooped, surprise surprise, it is not about climate, it's nothing but a backdoor world socialist government document aimed at bringing about "economic equality" by taking the western economies down to 3rd-world status.

This is one of the reasons why Poland is now quite opposed to any agreement:

"Quite frankly, from our point of view it's totally unacceptable that the poor countries of Europe should help the rich countries of Europe to help the poor countries in the rest of the world," said Polish Finance Minister Jan Rostowski.

http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/finance-warming.qf

[scribblet]

Phew, thank goodness, hopefully Canada will give a similar response to any such document.

[Mr.Canada]

Poland has a smart right wing government. We have a smart right wing government being held hostage by socialists and separatists. I don't think we're strong enough to say no. Those left wing types at Rabble love this sort of thing and support it. CBC said that Rabble has the pulse of Canada so they must be correct.

[scribblet]

Poland has a smart right wing government. We have a smart right wing government being held hostage by socialists and separatists. I don't think we're strong enough to say no. Those left wing types at Rabble love this sort of thing and support it. CBC said that Rabble has the pulse of Canada so they must be correct.

CBC said that - wow - that site is so far out of it, it's creepy.

[wyly]

Looks like the treaty to be presented at Copenhagen has been scooped, surprise surprise, it is not about climate, it's nothing but a backdoor world socialist government document aimed at bringing about "economic equality" by taking the western economies down to 3rd-world status.

:lol: reds hiding under your beds and all that

[Riverwind]

reds hiding under your beds and all that

Virtually all advocates of action on GW believe that each human should be entitled to an equal carbon allowance and that meeting these quotas means that the standard of living in rich countries has to be reduced to the level of developing countries because the rich don't deserve what they have and the poor deserve more. Obviously they don't use those words but they are the only rational consequence of any CO2 emissions policy based on per capita emissions and this is the only policy option being discussed. Edited October 5, 2009 by Riverwind

[wyly]

Virtually all advocates of action on GW believe that each human should be entitled to an equal carbon allowance and that meeting these quotas means that the standard of living in rich countries has to be reduced to the level of developing countries because the rich don't deserve what they have and the poor deserve more. Obviously they don't use those words but they are the only rational consequence of any CO2 emissions policy based on per capita emissions and this is the only policy option being discussed.

or to quote Harper, Climate Change is a socialist plot to steal our money

[Mr.Canada]

or to quote Harper, Climate Change is a socialist plot to steal our money

Well first there was global warming but that was proven to be untrue as the Earth is getting colder, not warmer.

Now, you environmentalists have changed the name to Climate Change because you found your first try to be false.

Not much credibility there.

[Guest TrueMetis]

Well first there was global warming but that was proven to be untrue as the Earth is getting colder, not warmer.

Now, you environmentalists have changed the name to Climate Change because you found your first try to be false.

Not much credibility there.

What's this bullshit? Care to site a source? It's not like the vast majority of scientists agree that the world is warming or anything. The world is getting colder my ass.

[Mr.Canada]

What's this bullshit? Care to site a source? It's not like the vast majority of scientists agree that the world is warming or anything. The world is getting colder my ass.

The only place the world is getting warmer is in the Arctic. Everywhere else the Earth's temperature is dropping. Look at the summer's we've been having not as hot as they used to be. The Earth temperature is dropping not rising that's why the environmentalist cults changed the name to climate change from global warming.

[Guest TrueMetis]

The only place the world is getting warmer is in the Arctic. Everywhere else the Earth's temperature is dropping. Look at the summer's we've been having not as hot as they used to be. The Earth temperature is dropping not rising that's why the environmentalist cults changed the name to climate change from global warming.

Oh because it was colder than usual were you live this summer (Hotter than usual here) global warming isn't happening. great logic.

[Mr.Canada]

Oh because it was colder than usual were you live this summer (Hotter than usual here) global warming isn't happening. great logic.

The environmentalist cult leaders changed the name from Global Warming to Climate Change. Proof that Global warming was a myth. Many leading scientists back this up.

[Guest TrueMetis]

The environmentalist cult leaders changed the name from Global Warming to Climate Change. Proof that Global warming was a myth. Many leading scientists back this up.

Name some.

[Mr.Canada]

kk

Edited October 5, 2009 by Mr.Canada

[Guest TrueMetis]

kk

I'm waiting.

[Mr.Canada]

I'm waiting.

We both know that this Climate Change is over hyped and dangerous and basically almost any plan the leaders try to think is mostly not sustainable at all like Kyoto. Ignatieff's proposed Carbon Tax would do more harm to the economy then it would do good. Any Climate Change program needs to include India and China who are the two worst polluters in the world. Any plan without them is useless and for nothing.

We need to concentrate on what's best for Canada not on the hype surrounding the issues.

[Riverwind]

Climate Change is a socialist plot to steal our money

The issues is the proposed "solutions" that will do NOTHING to actually stop the alleged climate change. For example, nuclear has issues but they are manageable compared to the impending CO2 induced disaster so why isn't a rapid exapansion of nuclear power at the top of the list of CO2 free energy? Another example, overpopulation in the developing world is the biggest source of future emissions yet environmentalists not only want to ignore this issue in favour of blaming the people in countries where the population is stable or declining - they want to actually encourage overpopulation by rewarding countries with higher CO2 quotas if there population increases.

I could go on because similar contradictions exist with all of the so-called "solutions" to Global Warming which activists shamelessly advocate. It should come as no surprise that people who think that different approachs would better address the problem would conclude that push for action on GW has nothing to do with the environment.

[Riverwind]

What's this bullshit? Care to site a source? It's not like the vast majority of scientists agree that the world is warming or anything. The world is getting colder my ass.

It is necessary to define what is meant by a "myth". Almost all sceptics that care about the science agree that CO2 emissions are causing the planet to warm but do not think the warming will be large enough to worry about. When these people use the word "myth" they are talking about the predictions of catastrophe spread by alarmists. There are also many sceptical scientists and economists who agree that CO2 regulation is necessary given what we know now but the CO2 mitigation policies being put on the table will not work and will not deliver enough benefits to offset the cost.

Leading scientists who dispute either the claims of catastrophe or the usefulness of current policy choices include: Linzden, Spencer, Christy, Pielke Sr. There are others - those are just the names from the top of my head.

Frankly, if climate change is an issue then it is time to open up a much wider discussion of policy options than is being currently permitted by the loud mouthed environmental activists who care more about their social agenda that the environment. For example, Japan's former government decided to put together a policy that would focus entirely on real reductions that can be achieved with existing technology. The trouble is the best they could do was a 7% reduction which was immediately attacked. Japan's new government caved and agreed to a much higher target even though they know they can never achieve it without spending trillions on bogus carbon credits which suits the environmentalists fine since all they care about is seeing large sums of money being taken from those filthy rich people and put in the hands of the good little corrupt dictators and bureaucrats that run most developing countries.

[ba1614]

It's a good thing we listened to the enviroment expert predictions at the original "Earth Day"......

* “...civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind,” biologist George Wald, Harvard University, April 19, 1970.”

* “By 1995, “...somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.”

* “Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor “...the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born,” Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.”

* “The world will be “...eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age,” Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.”

* “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970.”

* “By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half...” Life magazine, January 1970.”

* “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.”

* “Ehrlich also predicted that in 1973, 200,000 Americans would die from air pollution, and that by 1980 the life expectancy of Americans would be 42 years.”

* “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” Earth Day organizer Denis Hayes, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.”

Predictions of environmental disaster wrong

[Keepitsimple]

The goal of all socialists - or should I say the results of their actions...is to bring everything down to the lowest common denominator....to share misery equally....and the Copenhagen draft document is an excellent example.

If in fact Climate Change does become a driving factor in the near future - a dubious happening at best - then we should be talking about some of the tremendous positives that will result. Look at a world map and observe how much land in Canada, Russia, and China is not fit for year-yound farming. Those huge countries will not only have huge swaths of new farmland - their existing farmland will be more productive. Huge new sources of food to feed humanity. Populations nearer the equator will begin to migrate north, leaving behind land that was not very productive anyway.

The Global Warming myth has pretty well been exposed anyway since temperatures have on average, been no worse than constant since the El Nino effect of 1998. The IPPC and their cohorts have been disingenous with their facts...they purposely continue to use land-based temperature stations as a prime source of temperature monitoring. They are a farce. It's been well established that many, many of them are sited improperly and are affected by the local conditions that have grown up around the stations over the years. Temperature measurements from the troposphere via weather balloons show a slight decline in average temperature since 1998....and this is in spite of the fact that historically, temperature has always gone up by about one degree each century.

If Global Warming persists, we're all going to freeze to death.

Here's an interesting contrarian site called ICECAP: http://icecap.us/

Edited October 5, 2009 by Keepitsimple

[blueblood]

If in fact Climate Change does become a driving factor in the near future - a dubious happening at best - then we should be talking about some of the tremendous positives that will result. Look at a world map and observe how much land in Canada, Russia, and China is not fit for year-yound farming. Those huge countries will not only have huge swaths of new farmland - their existing farmland will be more productive. Huge new sources of food to feed humanity. Populations nearer the equator will begin to migrate north, leaving behind land that was not very productive anyway.

Here's an interesting contrarian site called ICECAP: http://icecap.us/

Your wrong about the farmland, Canada is already utilizing as much farmland as it possibly can. The problem with Canada is not as much climate, but soil structure. You cannot grow crops in rock, period. I'd assume the same about China. Russia, well that's a gong show.

Then there is the economics of farming you have to worry about. There is no demand when the buyer cannot pay. That means there will still be hungry people as they cannot afford to pay the costs associated with agricultural production. What your advocating is flooding the market with cheap food and expecting ag producers to produce it for peanuts. The free market always balances itself, at the end of the day broke people will still end up starving regardless.

[Riverwind]

Your wrong about the farmland, Canada is already utilizing as much farmland as it possibly can. The problem with Canada is not as much climate, but soil structure. You cannot grow crops in rock, period. I'd assume the same about China. Russia, well that's a gong show.

You make a good point, however, my understanding is the soil would change as new vegitation takes over but the process would take 1000s of years.

However, wouldn't a long growing season increase the productivity of existing farmland?

[blueblood]

You make a good point, however, my understanding is the soil would change as new vegitation takes over but the process would take 1000s of years.

However, wouldn't a long growing season increase the productivity of existing farmland?

Depends on precipitation levels...

No rain no grain.

Some areas could see a big increase in productivity, some could turn worse. Others would stay the same.

[eyeball]

No mention of how we should be able to come up with the money, to do so is a given that we will be in a depression. If we sign on to it, kiss economic recovery good-bye.

Has anyone seen any mention on how we can expect the planet to up with the natural resources we need to keep our economic system growing forever?

If we don't change how we do business you can kiss our ecosystems goodbye too. You can have a natural ecosystem without a human economy but you can't have it the other way around, its simply and physically impossible.