Jump to content

Copenhagen


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 506
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Who cares? It's a great read, making excellent points. Pointing out a technicality in the forum rules only illustrates your inability to respond intellectually with the ideas presented.

If you want to kill a forum in a hurray, post full articles, have no opinion or personal comment and move on.

You to like two sets of rules. Ones that are ok to break if you are in agreement with the violator and ones that should be enforced if you disagree with the violator.

Its becoming tiresome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You to like two sets of rules. Ones that are ok to break if you are in agreement with the violator and ones that should be enforced if you disagree with the violator.

Its becoming tiresome.

Nope. You're 100% wrong. I have never, ever, pointed to somebody I disagreed with for posting a whole article. I leave that stuff up to the moderators to take care of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I violated forum rules I apologize.I thought people would be more likely to read it than if I had just posted the link.I have to wonder if some are upset because the article does not mesh with the climate change/global warming side of the equation. ;)

To the contrary - that article highlights problems that many environments care deeply about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

Canada accounts for 2%. Alberta's oilsands, the favourite scapegoat of the enviro nuts, currently account for less than one-tenth of 1%.

2% of the entire planets CO2 emissions from less than .2% of the worlds population...that must put us in 1st place as polluters per capita...oh ya let stevie and jimmy go collect the gold medal for that and make us Canadians so proud...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2% of the entire planets CO2 emissions from less than .2% of the worlds population...that must put us in 1st place as polluters per capita
So do you believe that wealthier people should be allowed to have better cars, bigger houses, more food, more clothes, etc? If you answer is yes then why should wealthier people be expected to pollute no more than average?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2% of the entire planets CO2 emissions from less than .2% of the worlds population...that must put us in 1st place as polluters per capita...oh ya let stevie and jimmy go collect the gold medal for that and make us Canadians so proud...

What I find perplexing is that so much of the negative attention seems to be focused in the wrong direction.Canada is the bad guy while a country like China(one of the worlds largest emitters) get's a pass.The Chinese are building many coal fired power stations and.....they get a pass.Kyoto DID NOT APPLY to China,I fail to see the logic in that.Al Gore could have pushed for Kyoto when he was VP,but he didn't.Now he is making out like a bandit and personally has an enormous carbon footprint...but Gore,like China,get's a pass from the environmentalists.

Please,can someone explain why CO emissions from Alberta are unacceptable,but WAY more emissions from China are just peachy?Is the negative attention dependant on whether the offending governments are right or left wing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I find perplexing is that so much of the negative attention seems to be focused in the wrong direction.Canada is the bad guy while a country like China(one of the worlds largest emitters) get's a pass.The Chinese are building many coal fired power stations and.....they get a pass.Kyoto DID NOT APPLY to China,I fail to see the logic in that.Al Gore could have pushed for Kyoto when he was VP,but he didn't.Now he is making out like a bandit and personally has an enormous carbon footprint...but Gore,like China,get's a pass from the environmentalists.

Please,can someone explain why CO emissions from Alberta are unacceptable,but WAY more emissions from China are just peachy?Is the negative attention dependant on whether the offending governments are right or left wing?

leave gore out of the disscussion he's only bit player a high profile private citizen, he's just not important..

China puts far more emissions into the environment than Canada and China is aware that they have a problem but they like many other 3rd world countries are attempting to develop their way out of poverty...there is little room for them to stop emissions and continue development, if China's economy comes to a halt the damage to the world economy could be worse than the USA's recession...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I find perplexing is that so much of the negative attention seems to be focused in the wrong direction.Canada is the bad guy while a country like China(one of the worlds largest emitters) get's a pass.The Chinese are building many coal fired power stations and.....they get a pass.Kyoto DID NOT APPLY to China,I fail to see the logic in that.Al Gore could have pushed for Kyoto when he was VP,but he didn't.Now he is making out like a bandit and personally has an enormous carbon footprint...but Gore,like China,get's a pass from the environmentalists.

Please,can someone explain why CO emissions from Alberta are unacceptable,but WAY more emissions from China are just peachy?Is the negative attention dependant on whether the offending governments are right or left wing?

How much CO2 emissions from China for every person, How much for each Canadian? How much for each American?

Did your system tell each human being has same human right? Why you forget now?

How much CO2 emissions from volcanoes? How much from the oceans? How much other green house gas like water vapor generate from the oceans? Is the green house gas the main reason that cause global warming? No, the solar activity is the reason that men can do nothing on that: The Great Global Warming Swindle

It is a only a political game that US don't want others to develop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please,can someone explain why CO emissions from Alberta are unacceptable,but WAY more emissions from China are just peachy?Is the negative attention dependant on whether the offending governments are right or left wing?

I think the point is that Canada is expected to focus on problems coming from within our own borders. Nobody should be giving China a 'pass' on these issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....Please,can someone explain why CO emissions from Alberta are unacceptable,but WAY more emissions from China are just peachy?Is the negative attention dependant on whether the offending governments are right or left wing?

CO2 emmissions from Alberta are just fine....

Don't go changing, to try and please me,

You never let me down before,

Don't imagine, you're too familiar,

And I don't see you anymore.

I would not leave you, in times of trouble,

We never could have come this far,

I took the good times, I'll take the bad times,

I'll take you just the way you are.

Don't go trying, some new fashion,

Don't change the colour of your hair,

You always have my, unspoken passion,

Although I might not seem to care.

I don't want clever, conversation,

I never want to work that hard,

I just want someone, that I can talk to,

I want you just the way you are.

I need to know that you will always be

The same old someone that I knew,

What will it take till you believe in me,

The way that I believe in you?

I said I love you, and that's forever,

And this I promise from the heart,

I couldn't love you, any better,

I love you just the way you are.

I don't want clever, conversation,

I never want to work that hard,

I just want someone, that I can talk to,

I want you just the way you are.

Besides....Nanticoke is still going strong...cough...cough! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CO2 emmissions from Alberta are just fine....

Don't go changing, to try and please me,

You never let me down before,

Don't imagine, you're too familiar,

And I don't see you anymore.

I would not leave you, in times of trouble,

We never could have come this far,

I took the good times, I'll take the bad times,

I'll take you just the way you are.

Don't go trying, some new fashion,

Don't change the colour of your hair,

You always have my, unspoken passion,

Although I might not seem to care.

I don't want clever, conversation,

I never want to work that hard,

I just want someone, that I can talk to,

I want you just the way you are.

I need to know that you will always be

The same old someone that I knew,

What will it take till you believe in me,

The way that I believe in you?

I said I love you, and that's forever,

And this I promise from the heart,

I couldn't love you, any better,

I love you just the way you are.

I don't want clever, conversation,

I never want to work that hard,

I just want someone, that I can talk to,

I want you just the way you are.

Besides....Nanticoke is still going strong...cough...cough! :lol:

But Nanticoke is in Liberal territory so it's ok. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much CO2 emissions from China for every person, How much for each Canadian? How much for each American?

Did your system tell each human being has same human right? Why you forget now?

How much CO2 emissions from volcanoes? How much from the oceans? How much other green house gas like water vapor generate from the oceans? Is the green house gas the main reason that cause global warming? No, the solar activity is the reason that men can do nothing on that: The Great Global Warming Swindle

It is a only a political game that US don't want others to develop.

the great global swindle...proven fraud, the producers manufactured data, any competent high school science grad could dismantle the evidence...

and CO2 from volcanos is not significant, volcanic eruptions generally cool the planet not warm...

and if you do the search how much of the CO2 is produced by humans and from natural sources can be determined, anthropogenic produced CO2 is not the same as from natural sources...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cars pack our lots going nuts for Christmas spending. They say we can spend our way out of mental and fiscal oppressive recession. Yet they go on about Copenhagen as if great strides are being made. With one hand they insist that we consume and continue to destroy to gain back our lost material dreams...all the while with more consumerism comes CO2...You can not have it both ways...consumerism as a religion must be burnt at the stake in order for the real natural world to survive.

Those that are the masters of consumerism, that actually consume consumers on mass must curb their habitual and stupid ways of doing things...in other words consumerism as a way of life must end or we will in time end. MERRY CHRISTMAS...And please don't get all sucky and Pontius Pilate on me- time to stand up to the heads of the empire if they continue to wreck the empire by n

ot keeping up to the times...time for the rich to get a bit poorer...problem solved.

Love to you all...including the offenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the great global swindle...proven fraud, the producers manufactured data, any competent high school science grad could dismantle the evidence...

proof?

(BTW, I have a master's degree in Engineering, I ask for proof in case I am stupid than a high school grad :rolleyes: )

anthropogenic produced CO2 is not the same as from natural sources...

proof?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the great global swindle...proven fraud, the producers manufactured data, any competent high school science grad could dismantle the evidence...

It is not the film alone, there are other studies, like this from NASA: NASA Goddard study suggests solar variation plays a role in our current climate

The inconvertible fact, here is that even NASA’s own study acknowledges that solar variation has caused climate change in the past. And even the study’s members, mostly ardent supports of AGW theory, acknowledge that the sun may play a significant role in future climate changes.

Is NASA fraud too?

And this one: Global Warming 'Science'

However, as the work of McIntyre, McKitrick, Wegman, Carter and others has spread, scientific "consensus" in recent years has begun collapsing. A detailed review of 539 technical papers about climate change published between 2004 and 2007 found no evidence -- none --supporting specific "catastrophic" climate change due to man. In March 2009, a petition signed by over 31,000 scientists stated in part: "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."

...

What is becoming clearer is that the concept of "manmade global warming" may be one of the greatest hoaxes in world history. How soon this will become generally known will depend on how forcefully the political effort seeking both national and international control of industry and wealth redistribution can keep the hoax hidden by intimidation and forcefully amplified rhetoric while systematically jeopardizing the economies of America and other developed nations.

Edited by bjre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much CO2 emissions from China for every person, How much for each Canadian? How much for each American?

Did your system tell each human being has same human right? Why you forget now?

List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita

United States : 19.1 ton per capita 2007

Canada : 17.4 ton per capita 2007

Denmark : 9.2 ton per capita 2007

China : 4.6 ton per capita 2007

For China, there are 9% GDP is from export, so, at least 9% of CO2 is for other countries.

Edited by bjre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

proof?

(BTW, I have a master's degree in Engineering, I ask for proof in case I am stupid than a high school grad :rolleyes: )

proof?

the producers of the fantasy film have already publicly admitted their fraud and blamed it on film technicians, needless to say the scientists involved were not pleased having their work tampered with and conclusion attributed to them by the producers they did not share...I'm not going to dismember the entire documentary for you there are plenty of websites that do that quite well...if your an engineer as you claim I'm surprised you lack the curiosity to check it yourself, that's very un-Engineer like behaviour...

CO2 that can be identified as Anthropogenic in origin? you don't know? my nephew also an Engineer knows...isotope signature, that was grade 11 chemistry in my day...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not the film alone, there are other studies, like this from NASA: NASA Goddard study suggests solar variation plays a role in our current climate

The inconvertible fact, here is that even NASA’s own study acknowledges that solar variation has caused climate change in the past. And even the study’s members, mostly ardent supports of AGW theory, acknowledge that the sun may play a significant role in future climate changes.

Is NASA fraud too?

And this one: Global Warming 'Science'

you're an engineer and you can't understand the evidence?

the sun is always there, solar radiation always effects us, any anthroplogical forcings are added to natural solar forcings...it simple enough to understand...simple anaology for you...a pot of water is simmering away on the stovethe heat never rising enough for it to boil, heat gain =heat loss(that's your constant), now you put a lid on the top greatly reducing heat loss...what happens to temp and water inside the pot?

our climate has always had natural variation no climatologist has ever said different...solar forcings, meteors, mega volcanos, Milankovitch cylces all have different effects on the climate all for different reasons...what we are experiencing now is anthropological CO2 forcing something that also may have occured before but it wasn't caused by anthropological causes...it's an anthropological forcing on top of normal forcings such as solar and Milankovitch cycles...

However, as the work of McIntyre, McKitrick, Wegman, Carter and others has spread, scientific "consensus" in recent years has begun collapsing. A detailed review of 539 technical papers about climate change published between 2004 and 2007 found no evidence -- none --supporting specific "catastrophic" climate change due to man. In March 2009, a petition signed by over 31,000 scientists stated in part: "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."
nice cut'n'paste now give us a link to these "539 papers"

I suggest you read the petition of "31,000", I have...

1st-it doesn't dispute AGW, it disputes the damage that will result...

2nd it was a blind petition, there is no way to verify who signed the postcards...among the signers were Dentists, MDs, Structural Engineers etc...actual Climatologists hmmmm...you claim to be an engineer and were unaware that anthropological CO2 could be identified by it's isotopes how can you pass judgment when you don't understand the science?...asking an Structural Engineer or a Dentist his opinion on climate change would be like me asking my brother-in-law the petroleum Geologist his opinion on my gall bladder...if you want to ask an engineering question ask the appropriate engineer, if you've got a Climatology question ask a Climatologist not a Dentist...
What is becoming clearer is that the concept of "manmade global warming" may be one of the greatest hoaxes in world history. How soon this will become generally known will depend on how forcefully the political effort seeking both national and international control of industry and wealth redistribution can keep the hoax hidden by intimidation and forcefully amplified rhetoric while systematically jeopardizing the economies of America and other developed nations.
learn the science and then pass judgment it's clear you have not done so, this is not the behaviour of an engineer...conspiracy theories, socialist plots, doesn't come from rational people...
Edited by wyly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SO2 is an aerosol, volcanos cause global cooling, if the eruption is a major one like Pinatubo global temps will drop four a year or two....you verify my point that if you don't understand the science you can't make an informed opinion...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the producers of the fantasy film have already publicly admitted their fraud and blamed it on film technicians, needless to say the scientists involved were not pleased having their work tampered with and conclusion attributed to them by the producers they did not share...I'm not going to dismember the entire documentary for you there are plenty of websites that do that quite well...if your an engineer as you claim I'm surprised you lack the curiosity to check it yourself, that's very un-Engineer like behaviour...

Yes there are criticism in the web, some of which are from those people who have built their careers and reputations on it. There are lots of opinion on the web support it as well, which makes me think lots of that in the film maybe true.

CO2 that can be identified as Anthropogenic in origin? you don't know? my nephew also an Engineer knows...isotope signature, that was grade 11 chemistry in my day...

I have no idea how can isotope signature tell CO2 is out of your nose or from a monkey's nose. And I don't know what is difference between CO2 from your nephew's nose with those produce by a car as a greenhouse gas. :-)

......

It will take lots of time to reply this. I don't want to take that much time now... I guess there are posts exist from others that may helpful for you to understand it although I did not read it all...

Edited by bjre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,742
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CrazyCanuck89
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • DACHSHUND went up a rank
      Rookie
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      First Post
    • aru earned a badge
      First Post
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • User earned a badge
      Posting Machine
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...