Grist for the mill--Climate Change Shenanigans

[Morgeruat]

In Beijing, China accused developed countries Tuesday of trying to escape their obligations to help poor nations fight climate change. "We still maintain that developed countries have the obligation to provide financial support," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said, adding that was "the key condition for the success of the Copenhagen conference."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091215/ap_on_sc/climate

There's the crux of it, right there. Bleed the wealth off of 1st world countries, redistribution, "foreign aid", however you want to put it, it's all about $. I think China could easily clean their act up, for the 2008 Olympics they restricted traffic to even or odd car license plate #'s on alternating days in Beijing to improve air quality. Also in their rush to industrialize, they've taken environmentally unsound shortcuts. (satellite photos show the waste China has dumped into the ocean making it's way over to the US West Coast). Let me point out (not that I should have to, my stance has been pretty clear all along) that as an Idaho native, I'm all for preserving natural beauty, controlling what we put into the environment, and leaving something beautiful behind. It's a strange dichotomy, the most right-wing conservative republican state in the US and we're also some of the fiercest people you'd see on keeping our state clean, even discussing temporarily storing Nuclear waste there causes a huge public uproar.

I don't think it's our responsibility to clean up the world, or give freakin China money to fix their shoddy workmanship. They own most of the world's wealth at this point, and the vast majority of US debt, paying them off to clean up their act is nothing short of a shell game, we borrow $ from them, give them $ in foreign aid, sell our goods under extremely favorable conditions (thanks to FTA's), give them more $ under envorinmental policies, and then pay back the debt (none of the previous "gifts" have taken off the amount we "owe" to China either, so they rob us coming and going), and the same can be said for many other countries involved in this fraud. A shell game, however, only works as long as the dupe buys one simple premise. That the game is fair, and that they have a chance to win.

[John D Harris]

Originally Posted by SecretMaster Jeeze you act extremely condescending and now I post my reponse. What is your response?

The original post to which you replied was to machinehead.... are you machinehead there SM? I don't claim to have a climate degree never have never will. I don't hang my hat on having a degree. I live in an Univesity town, I can't walk out my back door and swing a stick without hitting a PHD. And the majority of them are idiots, don't make the mistake of thinking that intellegence and education are the same thing. It is entirely possible to be educated beyound one's intellegence.

What is more condesending Claiming that one must have a degree to be able to speak on a subject and have a valid POV on something (The Climate). Then turn around and Claim that a POV should be dismissed because of Articles that you have no degree to be able to speak with authority on (as per your actions trying to dismiss the 31,000+ signatures)? Does your climate education give you any special POV on Medical matters (Remember you set upt the standard of having to have a degree in something to be able to speak about it.)? So what's your medicial degree?

I don't know about what they call that where you come form but where I come from that's called hypocrisy. But be my guest, I'm not the type of man to let hypocritical reasoning effect me. I just love folks who have agenda's claiming that others are incorrect for having agenda's. Do I have an agenda? You bet your sweet bippy I do, I don't lie or try to hide it behind BS & poetry.

[John D Harris]

Originally Posted by SecretMaster I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. We are all aware of Archimedes Principle. Yes, Arctic ice melt will not cause the oceans to rise. But there is a considerable amount of water locked up in Antarctica and glaciers elswhere around the world. That ice melt will cause sea levels to rise, although I'm dubious to the extent that the media reports. I'm not too familiar with that subject matter, so I can't definately say. But I have the feeling the media are reporting the extreme scenarios.

Using the ice volume figures from above it is straightforward to estimate the effect on sea level were all this ice melted. Melting the 29,300,000 km3 of grounded ice would produce 26,100,000 km3 of water. Note that melting of floating ice has no effect on sea level. Also, about 2,100,000 km3 of the grounded ice in Antarctica is below sea level [19] and would be replaced by water. Thus, the net addition to the world's oceans would be about 24,000,000 km3 of water spread over the 361,000,000 km2 area of the world's oceans, giving a depth of 67 meters. The new ocean area would be slightly larger, of course, since some areas now land would be covered with water. The final result would be around 66 meters (current estimates range between 63 and 75 meters).

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/envi...aterworld.html

Graph to view http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibi...map_graph.html

This graph shows the general trend of changing ice volume on the Earth over the past 750,000 years. The extent of ice is estimated using changes in the amount of different isotopes of oxygen found in the calcium carbonate shells of planktonic sea creatures (foraminifera). These data are from Imbrie and others (1984). The portions of the curve marked with "G"s are times when glaciers may have reached into the midwestern U.S. The timing of midwestern U.S. glacial advances prior to 40,000 years ago are not well known. The advances indicated on this graph are taken from Richmond and Fullerton (1986).

*note* there was less ice aprox 125,000 years ago we still have a long way to go before we reach the levels melted Ice that Mother nature did all on her own. "Note that it has taken 18,000 years to melt 60% of the ice from the last ice age. The remaining ice is almost entirely at the north and south poles and is isolated from warmer weather"

[Morgeruat]

It's also worth noting at the Climate Summit, OPEC is lobbying for reparations. They want us to pay them for the oil we would have bough, but won't if we go green, yeah, pay them for a product we're not going to be picking up, and they won't be producing (or rather they'll cut production to maintain prices, and sell it to China and India instead of the US)

[Timber Loftis]

I don't feel it merits a new thread, so I'm resurrecting this one. I published an article last week on this topic:
http://www.uhlaw.com/epa_endangerment_finding/

Enjoy.

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Timber Loftis I don't feel it merits a new thread, so I'm resurrecting this one. I published an article last week on this topic: http://www.uhlaw.com/epa_endangerment_finding/ Enjoy.

Congratulations on getting published, TL.

[Timber Loftis]

By hook or by crook:
http://www.martenlaw.com/news/?20091...ble-co2-limits

First plant to accept enforceable CO2 limits.

So, the question isn't whether or not you want GHG regulation, it's what flavor you prefer:
- Cap and trade, market based?
- Command and control regulation from EPA?
- A patchwork quilt of laws and regulations spanning 50 states?

Pick your flavor, but you WILL EAT YOUR BRUSSEL SPROUTS YOUNG MAN.

[robertthebard]

No, I won't, and you can't make me. Nyah nyah, oh look, alien side boobs.