Argus Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 what's with this morning's fervor for one word "YES or NO" answers? There's no shortage of examples of the failed policy (or lack of policy) Harper Conservatives have engaged in... visible or covert. There's no shortage of past discussion in that regard through an assortment of threads, in an assortment of MLW forums. In your zest for full-bore, wide-open, full development of Canadian resources (by any country with money to invest), there's only one answer that will meet your measure. Your/that position does not recognize the term 'sustainable'... your/that position does not recognize the effect of your favoured kind of development of Canadian resources on the world's principal and continued reliance on fossil-fuels... you know, with its resulting, as you say, "significant impact on climate change". You should be a politician. All that verbiage without actually addressing the question. I'll answer it for you. No. No policy any Canadian government implements is going to have any significant impact on global warming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 What political ideology do you think is significantly underrepresented in federal politics? It would be kind of nice to have a conservative party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 You should be a politician. All that verbiage without actually addressing the question. I'll answer it for you. No. No policy any Canadian government implements is going to have any significant impact on global warming. no - I answered your question... you just don't care for the answer! So you ignore what I said and you bluster with your unsubstantiated opinion - well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 no - I answered your question... you just don't care for the answer! So you ignore what I said and you bluster with your unsubstantiated opinion - well done. Bluster all you want. Canada produces at best 1.4% of global emissions. Even if we cut that by 99% (an impossibility) a few months of increases from China and India will more than make it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 ...No policy any Canadian government implements is going to have any significant impact on global warming. True 'dat....and why the Chretien/Martin Kyoto FAIL didn't really matter. It was all bluster from the 'git go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 Bluster all you want. Canada produces at best 1.4% of global emissions. Even if we cut that by 99% (an impossibility) a few months of increases from China and India will more than make it up. apparently you couldn't even be bothered to read my reply before showcasing your bluster-bus! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) apparently you couldn't even be bothered to read my reply before showcasing your bluster-bus! Your reply was largely unreadable, but yes, I did go over it with considerable amusement. It tried to hide your lack of an answer but failed miserably. Edited October 10, 2014 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 True 'dat....and why the Chretien/Martin Kyoto FAIL didn't really matter. It was all bluster from the 'git go. imagine that! Once again, for the brazillionth time, you trundle forward with your "Kyoto FAIL" BS! But there's a flip-floping wrinkle here... you're back to, once again, couching that with a Liberal government targeting. Of course, once the waldo showed you didn't know what you were talking about (no surprise, evah), in regards to what Liberal governments actually did and intended to do (before Harper Conservatives stopped Kyoto in favour of their own "Made in Canada" solution... which they completely ignored), you shifted that up to (for the longest time now) labeling it "Canada's Kyoto FAIL". what gives... why the shift back again? Why have you shifted away from your reverted labeling? Do you feel an extra want to troll and attempt to inflame today? Why aren't you continuing your reverted labeling in calling it "Canada's Kyoto FAIL"? of course, as is your way... as is my way in responding in kind, the real Kyoto FAIL (as you say), is that of the U.S.A! Again, the U.S. shape/tailors the treaty to satisfy its want, has the community of nations commit based on U.S. participation, commits to an emission reduction level... commits to the community of nations, and then, per typical norm, the U.S. refuses to actually ratify the treaty. That sir, is the real, as you say, "U.S. Kyoto FAIL". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 Your reply was largely unreadable, but yes, I did go over it with considerable amusement. It tried to hide your lack of an answer but failed miserably. such (fake) bravado in your attempt not to have to actually respond in any reasonable/meaningful manner. I responded to you honestly... I respected your question and answered accordingly, with respect. On the other hand, your subsequent replies have highlighted the exact opposite on your part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 I could be wrong but my view is, if Justin's goes down in the polls, then the NDP could come up the middle and take the election. 60% didn't vote for Harper and if that 60% really wants him gone, and Justin's since ready in the voters minds of the PMO, then they will vote for the NDP. The NDP leader is a very good at what he does and even if he got a minority, that better than have the Tories in power!!You can't honestly believe the NDP will be good for the economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hudson Jones Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 So every country should wait for other countries to change their approach to climate change? What a terrible way to argue not to do anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrimeNumber Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 So every country should wait for other countries to change their approach to climate change? What a terrible way to argue not to do anything. That's the conservative way, point fingers at everyone else because they aren't doing what they said they would do and cry that it isn't fair. Even though we said we would do it under a different government, then reneged under the new government because it was "toooo haaarrd" then came up with their own solution, that again they can't do it because it is "tooo haaard". What happened to that good old conservative ingenuity, oh yeah that only applies to money, themselves and the present. Not the future, anyone else or the environment, or their best pals in Oilberta. Damn the children, we're making bank! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 So every country should wait for other countries to change their approach to climate change? What a terrible way to argue not to do anything. Note that I did not say we should or should not do anything in particular. I pointed out that all the hysteria was wildly out of line given that Canada contributes so little to world Co2 emissions, and that no amount of cutbacks on our part would have any significant influence. If we had lived up to our obligations under Kyoto, for example, would global warming be slowed at all? Nope. The increasing emissions from China, India and other third world countries would have VASTLY offset any curtailment on the part of Canada. As it will in future. Whether the globe is warming due to CO2 emissions or not, our best best would be to consider how best to offset the damaging impacts on humans. As for CO2 emissions themselves, they will go down as technology (ie, electric cars) makes other energy sources more economical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 Note that I did not say we should or should not do anything in particular. I pointed out that all the hysteria was wildly out of line given that Canada contributes so little to world Co2 emissions, and that no amount of cutbacks on our part would have any significant influence. If we had lived up to our obligations under Kyoto, for example, would global warming be slowed at all? Nope. The increasing emissions from China, India and other third world countries would have VASTLY offset any curtailment on the part of Canada. As it will in future. Canada has an obligation; one Harper Conservatives have totally abrogated. However, once again, you ignore/negate the impact Canada will have in foisting non-sustainable tarsands production on the world... what that means for emissions... what that means for impacting a more timely shifted lessening reliance upon fossil-fuels. Because this is totally against your 'development to the max' mindset, you simply choose to ignore it. Your own follow-up below has you talking of a "natural emissions reduction... one tied to the economics of technology shifts"! Any thought what contributing to the delay of that technology shift, of impacting the economics of that shift, might do to global emissions? . Whether the globe is warming due to CO2 emissions or not, our best best would be to consider how best to offset the damaging impacts on humans. As for CO2 emissions themselves, they will go down as technology (ie, electric cars) makes other energy sources more economical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 Canada has an obligation; one Harper Conservatives have totally abrogated. However, once again, you ignore/negate the impact Canada will have in foisting non-sustainable tarsands production on the world... The oil sands have a negligible impact on world oil prices. The discovery of fracking has far, far, far more. Technology will advance as it advances, and not before. Lots of money has been and continues to be pumped into the creation of renewable energy and the efficiency of engines, and that will not change. The money spent on things like Europe's emissions trading scheme, on the other hand, is purely wasted and serves no purpose but to enrich some at the expense of others. The enthusiasm the UN has for doing so, for transferring money from western nations to third world nations killed the following rounds, and ultimately doomed any sort of real international agreement. Nor is any real reduction possible until China, India and other large producers commit to that and actually do it. And I don't see that happening any time soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 W pik? Who knows, hell I even doubt he knows the term. But I could be wrong I'll bet you a shekel you're right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.