It is interesting, because Colorado/Kansas/Missouri are having their worst winter in many, many years. A few weeks ago we had 4 inches of ice with a foot of snow on top of it. This weekend two inches of ice is forecasted.
If anyone has any extra cans of hairspray, flatulating cows, Hummers, etc I would like to request that you use them to warm this planet a little more. We just got through 3 days of freezing drizzle and about 300,000 people are without power. The next two days lows are to be around 0 (that would be zero F for the metrically challenged). It looks like a tornado has went through except the (dark) homes are undamaged. Undamaged for the most part anyway, I have a tree laying on mine. Attached is a picture of the typical ice buildup.
So again, let's all work together to warm this orb up to avoid something like this in the future.
The North of Europe has been hit with high winds, and heavy seas. Skiing is off in the Pyrénées down here, though, because there is no snow !
The problem with "Global Warming" is in the title, which is why most scientists are using "Climate Change" or "Deregulation" in their arguments, because it's hard to get people who maybe lack information to understand when it's snowing or sleeting that the Planet is warming up, and that the Arctic and Antarctica are losing hundreds of km of pack ice, as it melts into the Oceans ! http://nsidc.org/news/seaice/
Global warming causes the seasons to get mixed up, giving us warm, summer days in NY, for example, and blizzards only a few hundred klicks away. Unpredictability in weather patterns has NEVER been this dramatic. Watching some of the satellite photos from years ago and comparing the trends to the last 10 or so years is interesting. The violence of the storms we are getting buffeting France on an increasingly regular basis is worrying, but still nowhere near the intensity of the "Hurricane Alley" ! "phew !"
Did you look at the Manicore link I used in one of my posts ? It's pretty comprehensive, and he covers all the other European countries actions as well. Its a good, professional site too.
George Bush suffered heavy international criticism for rejecting the Kyoto Protocol, but it now appears he was exactly right: The treaty is a "fiasco,” Forbes magazine declares. The treaty was negotiated in 1997 as a way to slow global warming, and formally took effect in February, without U.S. participation.
The Clinton administration agreed to the protocol, but the Senate refused to ratify it, in part because developing countries that were major polluters and trade competitors, particularly China and India, refused to participate in the Kyoto accord. So right now "Kyoto is essentially a western European proposition,” Forbes reports.
But "China and India together send more tons of carbon into the atmosphere than all of western Europe combined, and the U.S. accounts for more than China and India together.” Therefore it has become "painfully obvious that the treaty was a fiasco,” Dan Seligman writes in Forbes. Even Britain’s Tony Blair, a supporter of the protocol, seemed to admit defeat for the treaty when in a recent speech at the Clinton Global Initiative in New York, he conceded: "No country is going to cut growth” – which is the only known way to cut emissions, according to Forbes.
Ironically, even western Europe is not reducing emissions. According to the protocol, western European nations must reduce their emissions to levels 8 percent lower than those of 1990. But in the years since the treaty was negotiated, carbon dioxide levels increased by 7 percent in France, 11 percent in Italy and 29 percent in Spain. Overall, the increase for western Europe was 5.4 percent.
"After many years of European chatter about the monstrous evil perpetrated by George W. Bush in rejecting Kyoto,” Forbes concludes, "it is of possible interest that the increase in carbon emissions in the U.S. during those years was slightly lower (4.7 percent).”
THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE
19 South LaSalle Street #903
Chicago, IL 60603
phone 312/377-4000 · fax 312/377-5000 http://www.heartland.org Editorial: Rogue Nation Has Become Consensus Builder
Author: James M. Taylor
Published: The Heartland Institute 01/01/2006
The year was 2001, and George Bush, reflecting a 95-0 U.S. Senate vote against the Kyoto Protocol during former president Bill Clinton's last term in office, definitively rejected U.S. participation in the Kyoto Protocol. As a result, global warming alarmists in the United States and Europe called Bush and the United States an "outlaw" and a "rogue nation." Now, just four years later, an amazing thing has happened. The United States has not changed its position, yet it has become the consensus builder for a more forward-looking approach to climate change.
Senate, Bush Sought Alternative
The resolution that unanimously passed the Senate in 1997 stated the United States would oppose any treaty that would impose serious economic harm on the U.S. economy and would place binding limits on industrial nations but would not apply to developing nations such as China and India.
As Kyoto contained both of the shortcomings feared by the Senate, Bush held firm and outlined a different U.S. approach to addressing climate change. Among global warming alarmists on both sides of the Atlantic, the reaction was vitriolic.
Alarmists Incensed
Time magazine, for example, called the U.S. a "rogue" nation whose "dangerous unilateralism" would end our role as world leader in international affairs.
Alarmists in Europe became downright ugly. The London Guardian called the U.S. rejection of Kyoto a "Taliban-style act of wanton destruction."
Conveniently forgetting that other nations, including Australia, also opted out of Kyoto, and that nations such as Russia signed on only after publicly challenging the scientific and economic justifications for it, activists portrayed the United States as an outlaw nation that, like a disgraced gunfighter in the Wild West, would be forced to "go it alone."
U.S. Finding Redemption
But, much as an unjustly maligned cowboy on the silver screen inevitably returns with a large posse and truth on his side, our "rogue" nation has slowly but inexorably become the world's leading consensus builder on climate change.
In July 2005, the United States led Australia, China, India, Japan, and South Korea in forming an international partnership to address climate change in a scientifically based and economically sustainable manner.
The transformation in U.S. global leadership was punctuated in November 2005, when British Prime Minister Tony Blair declared Kyoto and any other treaty demanding mandatory emissions cuts dead. According to Blair, mandatory emissions cuts are implausible unless technology is developed to make emissions reductions economically sustainable and until mandatory cuts apply to such nations as China and India.
Shortcomings Evident
Why did this dramatic transformation occur? There are many reasons. Despite the self-righteous statements of European Union leaders, the EU is failing miserably in its attempt to cut greenhouse gas emissions and is far short of its Kyoto goals. At the same time, through public- and private-sector cooperation exemplified by a $100 million grant from ExxonMobil to the Stanford University-led Global Climate and Energy Project, the United States has cut its greenhouse gas emissions every year since its 2001 rejection of the Kyoto Protocol.
Over the past three years, EU carbon dioxide emissions have risen (despite a tumbling economy), while U.S. carbon dioxide emissions have fallen (during a period of steady economic growth).
While the EU scores public relations points by vowing carbon dioxide cuts that never reach fruition, the U.S. has invested in and reaped the benefits of new technologies that, for example, dramatically reduce emissions of methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
As the European economy stumbles under its Kyoto burden, energy-intensive industry is relocating to China, where the government refuses to cut greenhouse gas emissions and where the economy sizzles. As Blair and others have come to realize, all the promised cuts in European greenhouse gas emissions will fail to make any dent in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels if cuts in Western emissions are outweighed by corresponding increases in Chinese emissions.
EU Economy Endangered
The final blow to Europe's Kyoto delusions may have been the November 7 release of an international study predicting substantial harm to European economies that abide by their Kyoto promises. Putting still more pressure on the already-reeling European economy, Kyoto would spark an approximately 25 percent jump in electricity prices and a roughly 2 percent reduction in gross domestic product if Europe were to meet its reduction targets, which it has yet to do. Any additional cuts required after Kyoto expires in 2012 would be even more punitive economically.
Tony Blair and other world leaders have come to realize that if you love "That 70s Show," wait until you see a rerun of "That 70s Economy" throughout Europe if the EU fails to follow Bush's lead on global warming.
James M. Taylor (taylor@heartland.org) is managing editor of Environment & Climate News.
For more information ...
A four-page summary of the Kyoto impact report issued by the International Council for Capital Formation, "The Cost of the Kyoto Protocol: Moving Forward on Climate Change Policy While Preserving Economic Growth," is available through PolicyBot™, The Heartland Institute's free online research database. Point your Web browser to http://www.heartland.org, click on the PolicyBot™ button, and search for document #18189.
__________________
2001 ST4 Mod Rod
Built by BCM in 2004 and still running like a clock. 120 HP at the rear wheel. 55 mpg. Thanks Bruce (and Jay)!
These people want you to continue smoking, farting and, most importantly, consuming as much as you possibly can, SUV's to OD'ing on meds !!
Consume, peasants, consume !!
Bwwaahaa haa !
By the way. Forbes was a member of the PNAC. Interesting, no ?
LOL! Cmon Dan you should know better by now than to give link showing another [more] valid view, ONLY their links have any value here or anywhere!
LK do you know if there is way for the common man to join or support that PNAC?
I just read their mission statement and Im in complete agreement with them, thnx for sharing!
the article says that "in the years since the treaty was negotiated, carbon dioxide levels increased by 7 percent in France"
and the response is - Ha ha ! Now that's a website with bias !
The article says - British Prime Minister Tony Blair declared Kyoto and any other treaty demanding mandatory emissions cuts dead. According to Blair, mandatory emissions cuts are implausible unless technology is developed to make emissions reductions economically sustainable and until mandatory cuts apply to such nations as China and India.
and the response is - These people want you to continue smoking, farting and, most importantly, consuming as much as you possibly can, SUV's to OD'ing on meds !!
The article says - Despite the self-righteous statements of European Union leaders, the EU is failing miserably in its attempt to cut greenhouse gas emissions and is far short of its Kyoto goals. At the same time, through public- and private-sector cooperation exemplified by a $100 million grant from ExxonMobil to the Stanford University-led Global Climate and Energy Project, the United States has cut its greenhouse gas emissions every year since its 2001 rejection of the Kyoto Protocol.
and the response is - Consume, peasants, consume !!
Bwwaahaa haa !
The article says - Over the past three years, EU carbon dioxide emissions have risen (despite a tumbling economy), while U.S. carbon dioxide emissions have fallen (during a period of steady economic growth).
and the response is - Ha ha ! Now that's a website with bias !
The article says - While the EU scores public relations points by vowing carbon dioxide cuts that never reach fruition, the U.S. has invested in and reaped the benefits of new technologies that, for example, dramatically reduce emissions of methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
and the response is - Ha ha ! Now that's a website with bias !
The article says - The final blow to Europe's Kyoto delusions may have been the November 7 release of an international study predicting substantial harm to European economies that abide by their Kyoto promises. Putting still more pressure on the already-reeling European economy, Kyoto would spark an approximately 25 percent jump in electricity prices and a roughly 2 percent reduction in gross domestic product if Europe were to meet its reduction targets, which it has yet to do. Any additional cuts required after Kyoto expires in 2012 would be even more punitive economically.
and the response is - By the way. Forbes was a member of the PNAC. Interesting, no ?
XFBO
LOL! Cmon Dan you should know better by now than to give link showing another [more] valid view, ONLY their links have any value here or anywhere!
Oddly, our links seem to be the only ones that don't come from the right-wing über-nationalist and Patriotic "Screw the Planet, we're all right Jack side."
You know, our links like NASA, general scientific consensus, astute observations and realistic propositions. You guys are the ones here presenting bad links, but they are interesting, and go a fair way to explaining why so many Americans go "Doh..." when asked if they understand the issues.
Quote:
LK do you know if there is way for the common man to join or support that PNAC?
I just read their mission statement and Im in complete agreement with them, thnx for sharing!
All that is needed is to be a fascist asshole, hopefully with lots of money and no scruples, an obsession with the "End-of-Times" and the return of the Messiah, keen on killing Arabs and plundering the planet, and capable of maintaining a William Kristol smirk until your ears bleed. Being a competent liar, and able to believe almost anything will help too.
If the scattered remnants of the traitorous PNAC turn you down, you can always try the AEI or the FDD, as that seems to be where most of these loathsome little creatures have scuttled too after people began to wake up to what the PNAC REALLY stood for...
You may look quite fetching in an orange jumpsuit, XFBO.
the article says that "in the years since the treaty was negotiated, carbon dioxide levels increased by 7 percent in France"
and the response is - Ha ha ! Now that's a website with bias !
The article says - British Prime Minister Tony Blair declared Kyoto and any other treaty demanding mandatory emissions cuts dead. According to Blair, mandatory emissions cuts are implausible unless technology is developed to make emissions reductions economically sustainable and until mandatory cuts apply to such nations as China and India.
and the response is - These people want you to continue smoking, farting and, most importantly, consuming as much as you possibly can, SUV's to OD'ing on meds !!
The article says - Despite the self-righteous statements of European Union leaders, the EU is failing miserably in its attempt to cut greenhouse gas emissions and is far short of its Kyoto goals. At the same time, through public- and private-sector cooperation exemplified by a $100 million grant from ExxonMobil to the Stanford University-led Global Climate and Energy Project, the United States has cut its greenhouse gas emissions every year since its 2001 rejection of the Kyoto Protocol.
and the response is - Consume, peasants, consume !!
Bwwaahaa haa !
The article says - Over the past three years, EU carbon dioxide emissions have risen (despite a tumbling economy), while U.S. carbon dioxide emissions have fallen (during a period of steady economic growth).
and the response is - Ha ha ! Now that's a website with bias !
The article says - While the EU scores public relations points by vowing carbon dioxide cuts that never reach fruition, the U.S. has invested in and reaped the benefits of new technologies that, for example, dramatically reduce emissions of methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
and the response is - Ha ha ! Now that's a website with bias !
The article says - The final blow to Europe's Kyoto delusions may have been the November 7 release of an international study predicting substantial harm to European economies that abide by their Kyoto promises. Putting still more pressure on the already-reeling European economy, Kyoto would spark an approximately 25 percent jump in electricity prices and a roughly 2 percent reduction in gross domestic product if Europe were to meet its reduction targets, which it has yet to do. Any additional cuts required after Kyoto expires in 2012 would be even more punitive economically.
and the response is - By the way. Forbes was a member of the PNAC. Interesting, no ?
How to respond to right-wing fact-free but seemingly serious web-sites, presented by literate but totally monopolar, one-track minded and hopelessly subdued-by-propaganda personages.
Step two. Let their cognitive juices flow over the bountiful information, soar along the myriad of links proposed, and maybe see a dim glow of understanding kindle in the opaque emptyness of their eyes.
On a more serious note, Dan, yes, the Europeans are aware that it will be a long slog, and our Industry isn't looking foward to having to reinvest all that lovely money earmarked for Ferraris and luxury yachts for something so vulgar and base as saving all life on the planet, but they seem to be getting on with it.
You want to double check the quotes you used pertaining to Tony Blair. Maybe the Forbed "journalist" was snorting some wheezer coke at the time and got a bit confused ?
This might help you. http://indeco.com/kyoto
BTW, I thought that all the American industry had been shipped to China ?
Footnote: The Der Speigel and Businessweek links are dead, but are available through Google. Sorry 'bout that. Try "Kyoto and Europe"
Last edited by Le Kiwi; 01-16-2007 at 09:20 PM.
Reason: links
Oddly, our links seem to be the only ones that don't come from the right-wing über-nationalist and Patriotic "Screw the Planet, we're all right Jack side."
You know, our links like NASA, general scientific consensus, astute observations and realistic propositions. You guys are the ones here presenting bad links, but they are interesting, and go a fair way to explaining why so many Americans go "Doh..." when asked if they understand the issues.
Wow ANOTHER American attack but a so called America lover. HEy LK, we dont need self proclaimed America supporters like yourself so just be real for a change and call a spade a spade......but that would require some nads wouldnt it?
Also 99.9% of your links arent from credible sources like NASA, they're some BS leftwingnut site with crazy ass theories. That's why I barely even look at your nonsense anymore.
All that is needed is to be a fascist asshole, hopefully with lots of money and no scruples, an obsession with the "End-of-Times" and the return of the Messiah, keen on killing Arabs and plundering the planet, and capable of maintaining a William Kristol smirk until your ears bleed. Being a competent liar, and able to believe almost anything will help too.
If the scattered remnants of the traitorous PNAC turn you down, you can always try the AEI or the FDD, as that seems to be where most of these loathsome little creatures have scuttled too after people began to wake up to what the PNAC REALLY stood for...
You may look quite fetching in an orange jumpsuit, XFBO.
No seriously, without all the mumbojumbo can I join forces with the PNAC cuz there are a LOT of smart & successful ppl involved with them it appears. Who knows it might rub off some.
I'm sorry, you may have mistaken the US Government and NASA, plus the European Environmental Agencies as "BS leftwingnut sites", but although that can be understood coming from you, you'll find that they are all pretty factual and "gasp !" middle-of-the-road.
Although science and rationality probably scare you, they ARE what makes the World go round...
The America and the American people I like seem about a million km away from the posturing, ignorant, intolerant, loud, misguided, ethically corrupt and morally bankrupt goosestepping right-wing fruitbats that I occasionally come across in my travels.
Assholes do seem to be a recuring theme in Humanity. Some of them even become leaders, with their vapid little vocal idiots seething around their legs as they stumble along through other peoples lives like a cowboy in a porcelain shop.
The PNAC would like you. Drones are always useful. Shit usually rubs off if you rub up against it.
How to respond to right-wing fact-free but seemingly serious web-sites, presented by literate but totally monopolar, one-track minded and hopelessly subdued-by-propaganda personages.
"Post a broad series of links which all cover fairly comprehensively the subject." WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP FROM THIS GUY................................AGAIN!!! LMAOOOOOO!
Ran out of time, gotta run, taking the famiglia out for a some shopping and a bite to eat. I dont know how we'll do it........economy is so bad and its unseasonably warm out there (30 degrees and dropping )!!!
XFBO.
The links are a BROAD cross spectrum of opinion and fact, mostly center, or left of center politically. Businessweek is possibly the more "right" of center. I chose them because they express a general point of view, rather than just ONE point of view. This issue is too important to class as being a "left-wing" or "right-wing" issue. Dramatic climate change makes no exceptions for rich or poor.
Its interesting, so far all the sites you "No, it isn't" guys have posted, with rare exceptions, gravitate around the same "junk science" site, with a tiny cadre of "scientists", few of them peer-reviewed, making almost negationist style "Oh, that Global Warming is nonsense" type statements, or inflating particular points to push certain biases. The fact that these sites or sources are all in the pocket, or have paper trails leading up to the pockets, of big industrial or petro-chemical groups doesn't make you question their bias or neutrality ?
As media groups increasingly become parts of big-business empires, I feel that sometimes the important stuff tends to get a bit, er, "left out". Whether this is by design or by accident, I can't say, but I do like to try and get as much info as possible, and from as many different sources as possible, before I make up my mind on a subject.
Read, for example, the stuff on the Kyoto treaty, in the Businessweek site. Use their search engine, type in kyoto, and expand your brain. I can't get the direct link to work. The "Independent" article was good, too, but its now on a "pay-to-view" archive. Filthy capitalists !
The links were center from a political point of view. I didn't bother to include more extreme links from the left, because they contribute almost as much to the background din as the links and bias from the right.
This is a serious issue. Your niggling over a site being "left" or "right" but ignoring the factual content is a bit strange. Do you deny that Humans are the most important creators of Greenhouse gases, and that Global Warming (Cooling, if it makes you feel better...) or "Climate Change" if you don't want to look like an idiot, is the most serious issue facing the Future of the Human Race ?
Do you deny that the VAST MAJORITY of any intelligent life on this planet is convinced beyond a shadow of doubt that WE have CREATED the current dramatic rise in PLANETARY temperatures ?
Do you also deny that if we created it, maybe we can reverse or at least minimise it's effects ?
Do you deny that ignorance and incomprehension are the biggest enemies that are facing any meaningful debate on this issue ?
Post some links, if you want, from peer reviewed climate change scientists that tell us that we (the large majority of people on the planet with eyes, ears and cognitive ability) are wrong.
He sure as hell better deny those points because each of them lacks science. I'll take a stab at it:
Do you deny that Humans are the most important creators of Greenhouse gases?
The phrase Greenhouse Gases makes a false assumption.
... and that Global Warming (Cooling, if it makes you feel better...) or "Climate Change" if you don't want to look like an idiot, is the most serious issue facing the Future of the Human Race ?
Global warming is the result of Solar Intensity. All other theories are just that - theories. The global warming we've seen in the past is a perfect example of why humans are not causing today's global warming. That's self-evident.
Do you deny that the VAST MAJORITY of any intelligent life on this planet is convinced beyond a shadow of doubt that WE have CREATED the current dramatic rise in PLANETARY temperatures ?
No, I do not deny that a lot of people have been convinced. These days it's easy to convince people of almost anything. Pick a subject.
Do you also deny that if we created it, maybe we can reverse or at least minimise it's effects ?
If by "it" you mean Global Warming, then yes I deny that man can do anything about Global Warming. If by "it" you mean greenhouse gases then no, I agree that man can reduce the emission of certain gases (at great expense and with no effect).
Do you deny that ignorance and incomprehension are the biggest enemies that are facing any meaningful debate on this issue ?
No, I agree that ignorance and the lack of ability to define "science" results in a lack of meaningful debate.
This is a serious issue. Your niggling over a site being "left" or "right"
Uh wrong again! Im "niggling" over another asinine remark made by you......when you go toting something as "BROAD CROSS SPECTRUM" when the fact is (self admittingly I might add) its center to LEFT. That's NOT BROAD CROSS SPECTRUM, you mindless baboon.
That's ALL I was pointing out, I cant take you seriously even IF you have some good info mixed in between your BS inaccurate remarks.
Do you understand that?
My guess and your history would be no and we're all gonna get another mouthful of mindless babble!
mumbojumbo can I join forces with the PNAC cuz there are a LOT of smart & successful ppl involved with them it appears. Who knows it might rub off some. 
)!!! 
Linear Mode
